What a weird way of responding to a post
@Verminator. Why am I not surprised you even managed to feck that up. If continue in kind.
If you post like a ten year old, expect to be treated like one.
You were disrespectful. If anyone was behaving like a child, it is you. Oh grow up. If sarcasm hurts your feelings, the internet probably isn't the place for you.
So what you're trying to say is: no, you can't find this report, nor can you find anywhere where I've said we should negotiate by offering the same amount. Great strawman.
What 'report' am I supposed to be looking for? Have you imagined something? If there isn't a report on this then are you confirming you just pulled these figures out of your arse, or are you referencing something reported?
Even the report you're referring to suggests the offer is £35mil plus £15mil add-ons. So no, it hadn't gone up £5mil in 5 years.
The cash offer was £35m and it still is, but with more add-ons.
Top fullbacks don't still cost £30m. Last summer's window is enough evidence of that.
Yeah, add-ons. This isn't something new. Pretending they don't exist isn't going to bring the offer down.
We've agreed to basically match the highest fee ever paid for a fullback,only despite having only played 1 full season, and trying to negotiate that down is low balling to you. Sounds like perfectly reasonable logic...
£35m plus £15m in add-ons does not match the record for a FB. If it did, we'd pay £50m cash and the deal would be done.
Is that TOO logical for you?
£35mil+£15mil=£35mil. Perfect logic.