Alex Scott - £25m to Bournemouth- Confirmed

[Davefevs]

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

The point I'm making Dave is that people seem to think that as soon as we get a 25 million bid, we'll accept it, almost as if that 25 million we put on his head is a release clause. People seem to think that the first club to offer 25 million will get him. 

You know that transfer fees can be incredibly complicated and that two 25 million pound bids probably wouldn't look the same.

The reality is a club will bid 25 million and we'll say "thanks, we'll get back to you after we've discussed it as a club" we'll then maybe leak it to the press that such and such has bid 25 million or get our agents or intermediaries to spread the word to other interested clubs to see if we can possibly get more from another club. 

 

That….….I agree with.  Don’t have to show our hand straight away.

[Davefevs]

19 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

Don’t think that is true. If a club offers £25m I am sure we would except it, but that does not make it nessecarily a binding contract.

There would be nothing to stop another club offering £26m possibly after missing out on another target.

In all of this nothing is set in stone until Alex signs a contract.

Witness Joe Bryan agreeing to go to Villa then legging it down the M1 when Fulham made, I assume, a more attractive offer. The better offer does not need to be higher wages.

Fulham didn’t offer City more money than Villa, Villa were Championship, Fulham Premier League, don’t forget.  I very much suspect the winner was Bryan / Fulham, not City, ie the attractive offer was for Bryan only!

19 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Lansdown added: "We've quoted £25m in the past, I really don't know where it goes. It's supply and demand, isn't it? If there are lots of clubs interested in him, then the value goes up. source

We haven't set 25m as our price, so we could easily reject 25 million if we know there are concrete bids in the pipeline from multiple clubs.

We could indeed….but once we accept an offer, it’s very unlikely we’d renege on that - that is the point.

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

I’m not sure “concrete” and “bids in the pipeline” really go together!

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Fulham didn’t offer City more money than Villa, Villa were Championship, Fulham Premier League, don’t forget.  I very much suspect the winner was Bryan / Fulham, not City, ie the attractive offer was for Bryan only!

We could indeed….but once we accept an offer, it’s very unlikely we’d renege on that - that is the point.

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

I’m not sure “concrete” and “bids in the pipeline” really go together!

With quite a few clubs interested, would we name a price? Or would it be a case of "what are you offering us?"

[Mr Popodopolous]

39 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Lansdown added: "We've quoted £25m in the past, I really don't know where it goes. It's supply and demand, isn't it? If there are lots of clubs interested in him, then the value goes up. source

We haven't set 25m as our price, so we could easily reject 25 million if we know there are concrete bids in the pipeline from multiple clubs.

Although on the flipside if nobody is willing to meet it then we have a decision to make. The jury is still out as to whether anyone will meet the £25m price tag but things can change in an instant.

If Bournemouth do then the dial moves significantly again although it seems to be giving clubs pause.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

then we have a decision to make

….Alex stays.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Davefevs

[chinapig]

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

With quite a few clubs interested, would we name a price? Or would it be a case of "what are you offering us?"

Unfortunately £25m is already in the public domain. But yes in a competitive negotiation it can be a good tactic to invite an offer. They might just offer more than you expected!

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

….Alex stays.

Well yes, basically yes but variables such as whether we may have a discontented player on our hands- if West Ham bid £22m as one report suggested and we flat out reject "£25m baseline and not a penny less" could Scott becoming disgruntled.

Then how might his value decrease going into the last 12 months. Still January of course but that window can be sketchy unless post a Winter World Cup (Stoke wouldn't have got £15m for Souttar IMO in a typical January window).

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Unan]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Fulham didn’t offer City more money than Villa, Villa were Championship, Fulham Premier League, don’t forget.  I very much suspect the winner was Bryan / Fulham, not City, ie the attractive offer was for Bryan only!

We could indeed….but once we accept an offer, it’s very unlikely we’d renege on that - that is the point.

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

I’m not sure “concrete” and “bids in the pipeline” really go together!

Concrete + bids in the pipeline /=/ we're confident that x team will put a bid in for y price. I'm no expert in transfer negotiations but for Mr Lansdown to mention "supply and demand" it seems, to me at least, to suggest that clubs will compete with each other, and offer more money. With some reconciliation, I do agree that it won't be a 'bidding war' or an 'auction', as in, several clubs won't keep trying to outbid each other, with City accepting bids, but I believe that we will reject offers, potentially even over 25m, if we believe we can get more elsewhere.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Unfortunately £25m is already in the public domain. But yes in a competitive negotiation it can be a good tactic to invite an offer. They might just offer more than you expected!

Christian Dailly.  Derby manager told don’t accept less than £2.5m.  Blackburn came in with £5.35m!!!

[Unan]

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Although on the flipside if nobody is willing to meet it then we have a decision to make. The jury is still out as to whether anyone will meet the £25m price tag but things can change in an instant.

If Bournemouth do then the dial moves significantly again although it seems to be giving clubs pause.

Agreed, the Lansdown comment I quoted was to more so show that there isn't an exact price set, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go for under £25m, although I'd hope not.

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Well yes, basically yes but variables such as whether we may have a discontented player on our hands- if West Ham bid £22m as one report suggested and we flat out reject "£25m baseline and not a penny less" could Scott becoming disgruntled.

Then how might his value decrease going into the last 12 months. Still January of course but that window can be sketchy unless post a Winter World Cup (Stoke wouldn't have got £15m for Souttar IMO in a typical January window).

My go to is that Sporting are paying circa 20 million for Gyokeres and he has 11 months left on his deal. 

Whilst Gyokeres is good, I don't ever see him eventually playing at a mid table premier league club, let alone a top 4 side. Alex Scott will. 

Also, we have the insurance that we will get compensation for Alex upon the expiry of his contract.

 

[Monkeh]

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

As I've just said. The 25 million isn't a release clause. It's ridiculous to suggest that we'd immediately accept a 25 million bid from the 1st club to offer it. That's not how it works. 

25 million is what we want, but it's by no means a set in stone figure. 

There is no formal process to making bids for players. You don't have to submit your bid to the EFL or anything. A bid isn't legally binding. A bid in most cases is just a telephone call which says something like "we'd like to offer you 25 million for Alex Scott and these are the terms of the transfer" it may then be put in an email about how they propose the deal is structured. 

No its not but its also the price we've said publicly we'd accept and would be our record sale, 

I can safely say if anyone bit 25 million, Bristol city would accept, I'd even put money on it

[chinapig]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Christian Dailly.  Derby manager told don’t accept less than £2.5m.  Blackburn came in with £5.35m!!!

Was it Seth Johnson who Risdale told that Leeds wouldn't pay a penny more than £35k a week, which was miles more than his agent was going to ask for?

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, Son of Fred said:

And if the 25 million was offered & the player does not wish to sign for that club????........

Alex is a bright young man - he won't be leaving us on any consideration other than to a destination of his choice - 

 

Then he turns down the contract, that wouldn't mean another club would bid more money, that's Peter Ridsdale style of thinking and any sane ceo would not do it, 

[Unan]

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

 

Do you not think that this is a possibility then? Again, I have no formal experience, but for example let’s say Tottenham are willing to spend up to 28m on Scott, and Bournemouth 26m, we’ve told them both to secure this player you must pay 30m, we’re open to offers, they both come in with offers of 20m, we inform both clubs that another club has bid the same amount and to secure the transfer you must pay more, each club is willing to pay more as they already have their maximum amount set and they’re both well under it, they then make additional bids etc etc. City would be at risk of a club potentially pulling out, but that is always the case, once one team has hit their limit then they simply won’t bid, or will say this is our final offer, and the other team may, or may not, offer more. We would, probably, get a larger sum than trying to call the bluff of an individual team. 
 

OR, maybe this is fanciful and not how the real word works.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Marcus Aurelius

[Mr Popodopolous]

13 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Agreed, the Lansdown comment I quoted was to more so show that there isn't an exact price set, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go for under £25m, although I'd hope not.

Fingers crossed that we either get our price or above or he stays and is happy to do so.

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

My go to is that Sporting are paying circa 20 million for Gyokeres and he has 11 months left on his deal. 

Whilst Gyokeres is good, I don't ever see him eventually playing at a mid table premier league club, let alone a top 4 side. Alex Scott will. 

Also, we have the insurance that we will get compensation for Alex upon the expiry of his contract.

 

That is true although banking on compensation in extremis dunno the formula tbh.

Think you undersell Gykores a bit and there is striker premium too though there is no doubt Scott is ahead of him at respective stages of their career..Scott has the English premium although has this taken a small step back with a recent slight liberalisation of football work permit regulations.

https://www.reuters.com/sports/soccer/new-rules-allow-english-clubs-sign-players-who-do-not-meet-work-permit-2023-06-14/

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, ScottishRed said:

Don’t think that is true. If a club offers £25m I am sure we would except it, but that does not make it nessecarily a binding contract.

There would be nothing to stop another club offering £26m possibly after missing out on another target.

In all of this nothing is set in stone until Alex signs a contract.

Witness Joe Bryan agreeing to go to Villa then legging it down the M1 when Fulham made, I assume, a more attractive offer. The better offer does not need to be higher wages.

But why would they? The last doughnut in the shop is a pound, some one offers a pound, do you come in and offer one fifty? No because it makes no sense, it isn't a auction, 

Why can't people grasp basic economics, it's mind bending

[bcfc01]

2 hours ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

If Spurs came in for the same money, he’d obviously go to Spurs, so Bournemouth could then offer 27, 28, 30m, hence starting a bidding war.

I don't think so.

The fee is 25m and everyone knows it.

Lets put it this way, Spurs offer 25m and Bournemouth offer 27m, Scott will join Spurs and there's nothing City can do about it. Spurs have met the asking price and the player wants to go there not Bournemouth.

As long as 25m is met, it will be down to Scott to decide who to join.

 

 

 

 

[Unan]

2 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

But why would they? The last doughnut in the shop is a pound, some one offers a pound, do you come in and offer one fifty? No because it makes no sense, it isn't a auction, 

Why can't people grasp basic economics, it's mind bending

You haven’t seemed to read the quote from Lansdown which states £25m was never the set price. Additionally, people will offer under 25m, 100%, so the analogy falls apart.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Marcus Aurelius

[Monkeh]

Just now, Marcus Aurelius said:

You haven’t seemed to read the quote from Lansdown which states £25m was never the set price. Additionally, people will offer under 25m, 100%, so the analogy falls apart.

But you don't get it, once city accept a bid be it 1 pound or 100 million pound, another club isn't going to suddenly bid more money, they are going to match the bid,

It really is thay basic

[Unan]

1 minute ago, Monkeh said:

But you don't get it, once city accept a bid be it 1 pound or 100 million pound, another club isn't going to suddenly bid more money, they are going to match the bid,

It really is thay basic

We won’t accept a bid when we believe we can get more money elsewhere, it really is that basic.

[Monkeh]

2 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

We won’t accept a bid when we believe we can get more money elsewhere, it really is that basic.

That's not the point I'm making though is it,

Once a bid is accepted another club IS  NOT GOING TO BID MORE THEN THE ALREADY ACCEPTED BID

[Unan]

1 minute ago, Monkeh said:

That's not the point I'm making though is it,

Once a bid is accepted another club IS  NOT GOING TO BID MORE THEN THE ALREADY ACCEPTED BID

You’ve said that 25m is what we’d accept, which isn’t accurate, there is no set price. I agree that someone won’t bid more than an accepted bid, but that’s not relevant to your initial comment(?) maybe I’ve missed a post..(?)

[phantom]

9 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not the point I'm making though is it,

Once a bid is accepted another club IS  NOT GOING TO BID MORE THEN THE ALREADY ACCEPTED BID

Surely if it becomes a bidding war that is EXACTLY what will happen

But it will also be reliant on how the money is paid, whether over 3 years or more?

[Merrick's Marvels]

21 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Lets put it this way, Spurs offer 25m and Bournemouth offer 27m, Scott will join Spurs and there's nothing City can do about it. Spurs have met the asking price and the player wants to go there not Bournemouth.

Why would City accept any lower offer, though?

In the scenario you quote, City tell Spurs their offer hasn't been accepted - the price has just gone up! So piss or get off the pot.  

[George Rs]

40 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

No its not but its also the price we've said publicly we'd accept and would be our record sale, 

I can safely say if anyone bit 25 million, Bristol city would accept, I'd even put money on it

Their point is, if we got the offer we won’t immediately drop everything and accept it straight away. there’s no point to it.

Much smarter to let it sit temporarily to see if other clubs (spurs/Brighton) who have more funds put their money where their mouth is.

If they don’t, we will probably then accept it and it’s up to Alex if Bournemouth is where he wants to go. But unless it was a release clause which it clearly isn’t accepting the first bid to come in immediately just because it matches a number the club stated 6 months ago is unlikely as it is illogical.

Edited July 12, 2023 by George Rs

[W-S-M Seagull]

45 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not the point I'm making though is it,

Once a bid is accepted another club IS  NOT GOING TO BID MORE THEN THE ALREADY ACCEPTED BID

A bid isn't 'accepted' until the transfer is completed. 

If we say to Spurs 25 million is acceptable, that is not legally binding. 

If for example Newcastle then came in at say 30 million then we're withdrawing permission for Spurs to discuss terms have medical etc and will allow Newcastle to progress the transfer.

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Christian Dailly.  Derby manager told don’t accept less than £2.5m.  Blackburn came in with £5.35m!!!

I’ve often wondered whether something similar happened when either Ralph Milne or Dave Cotterill departed?! 

[BCFC Rich]

I would say there are plenty of ways for it to become a bidding war. 

In real estate here in California (obviously there are big differences in RE and player sales).

When you are selling a property your client has a price they want, we even set a price a property is listed at.

You don't rush any decisions, wait to see how much interest there is and once you have an offer you let everyone who has shown interest know you have an offer.

If you think you will get more than one offer you set a deadline a few days ahead for offers. You would ask for highest and best offers by that deadline (sealed bids would be the closest UK equivalent). 

You see what everyone offers. You can the accept the highest/offer with the best terms. Or let everyone else know what the highest offer was give them a chance to match it. 

You can also counter one/some/all offer with higher terms that you want. 

We also need to remember that it's not just the fee that will matter the terms will also be SO important. If someone offers $25m and someone else offers $20m + 40% sell on, that's probably going to be at least as good an offer - I think most would prefer the later. 

 

TLDR - Plenty of ways a bidding war could happen + cash isn't the only factor. 

[Leveller]

58 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not the point I'm making though is it,

Once a bid is accepted another club IS  NOT GOING TO BID MORE THEN THE ALREADY ACCEPTED BID

But isn’t it like selling a house? Two buyers both want it and bid the price up until one refuses to go higher. Footballers aren’t like a tin of beans in a shop with a fixed price, are they? 
 

I agree we wouldn’t accept an offer then renege on it - gazumping - but why would we accept the first offer at our reserve price if we knew that higher bids were possible?