I understand this but how in the bloody hell did Liverpool sell players like Solanke for 19 million in 2019 when we can only sell Henderson for that amount when he has a lot more rep
We’re just not very good at selling our players
Dean Henderson | On loan at Forest | gives public outburst against United
- Thread starter Kush
- Start date
- Status
We’re just not very good at selling our players
Seems Garner could go back…
I really hope we don’t let him go back AND do a loan/option deal for Henderson. That’d be taking the piss a bit.
Garner could be leverage in the Henderson situation … “loan with obligation, Garner comes again” (though I’d actually prefer him to stay and get some Ft squad experience)
I really hope we don’t let him go back AND do a loan/option deal for Henderson. That’d be taking the piss a bit.
Garner could be leverage in the Henderson situation … “loan with obligation, Garner comes again” (though I’d actually prefer him to stay and get some Ft squad experience)
Because we give our scrub players 100k/week plus so they can't afford a huge transfer fee and the wages.
Garner should stay regardless of what happens, he's settled there and the manager trusts him.
Solanke was probably on a 10th of Henderson's wage. So the overall package probably wasn't that expensive for Bournemouth.
Our players are paid like title winners, Liverpool have title winners paid less than Henderson and he's not the only one. Yeah, like others have said, some of those players may be so desperate for football they'll accept a wage cut. But I'm sure that's only up until a certain point. Someone on £100k a week is unlikely to go down to £20k a week or something. So that's where things get difficult for us.
Liverpool, Chelsea, City, they don't tend to have squad players sitting around on big money and when they do it effects the fee. For example, Shaqiri left Liverpool for £10m. No doubt, in part, because of his wages. If that was us we'd be saying Shaqiri has played in a title winning side give us £40m or nothing. Most of the time the clubs we're dealing with will say: 'Ok, nothing.' Then go pick someone up from someone else.
This is the nasty situation we've got ourselves into because of our out of control wages and bizarre contract renewal policy.
If he recaptures his Sheffield United form at Forest and breaks into the england squad he'll be worth a lot more than £20 million so the buy option doesn't make sense for us. It needs to be at least £30 million.
Terrible deal. The whole point of selling him was to add funds for this summer and we should have pushed for £30m. Instead, we're giving them a loan and if he performs well, which he probably will, they buy him for £20m and his value is immediately £40m. Madness.
No but hes on the same wages as Sadio Mane is/was on and double what Andy Robertson is on.
We're paying our reserve goalie wages other teams can dream off. If we get to sell, we wont recive a huge sum, but our wages will go down.
To fix this club will take years
To fix this club will take years
Imagine they'll also be a loan fee for this season + the 20m. And presume they'll cover a decent chunk of his wage this season. Not ideal by any means but he wants out and seems we are happy to oblige now. Guess with hindsight, there was some panic with that deal we offered him. Strange how it's turning out though - MEN were adamant he was starting last season until he got Covid.
Rather than struggling to sell, I'd say we've struggled to DECIDE to sell. We just seemed hellbent on stockpiling players.
Lets hope this story / progression of a deal with Forest kicks some other clubs into gear in regard to making an offer. Wouldn't surprise me if there are interested clubs who's strategy for dealing with us is to make a derisory offer on deadline day to try and cash in on our complete inability to sell players.
Just when you think that our board can not beat previous levels of stupidity……..they go and pull this out to f the bag. We need funds for this season, and this gives us nothing in return, he has a good season and they get a very good GK on the cheap. He has a stinker and we get him back and struggle to offload him due to his high salary, the very least……NFFC should be paying his salary in its entirety.
40m to Newcastle one minute, now a year's loan, and 20m if they fancy it.
Lovely.
Give it a few weeks and it'll be a 2 year loan deal somewhere and 5m option.
Lovely.
Give it a few weeks and it'll be a 2 year loan deal somewhere and 5m option.
This is why every year without fail it's hilarious when people do their ins and outs list.
The out list always gives a ludicrous sky high figure of sales like 100m, when the true figure we'd get due to stupid wages would be about 20m.
It's even worse this year as Matic, Mata, Pogba, Lingard have all gone for zero.
Ramsdale did cost around 40m after being relegated again and again, Deano has a higher ceiling and should not be cheaper.
It's clear they want his wages off the books. Typical big contract to any English player in the club. Double that if you've come through the youth system. I'd say he is on at least 180K a week.
Would be very surprised if Forest coughed up all of his wages as well would make him far and away there best paid player.
That "option to buy" surely is taking the piss. If that's the only interest he's gathering, he'll have to seriously readjust his career expectations. I'd take the 20m guaranteed though.
£20m is a much more realistic price for him than the £40m being talked about previously
In reality though, I can’t see them actually ending up buying him due to the wages he’s on here.
Does this mean another season of De Gea as undisputed no.1? 
There's a lot of mention of his wages, but he strikes me as one of the few players we've got who would take lower wages to gain a starting spot. He seems desperate to play and confident enough that he'll prove himself worthy of those wages in the long-term anyway.
Obviously I could be wrong, but that's how he comes across to me. And of course, it's one thing to be willing to drop down to 70-80k a week and another thing to go down to 30-50k which is all that many other clubs might be willing to pay for now.
Obviously I could be wrong, but that's how he comes across to me. And of course, it's one thing to be willing to drop down to 70-80k a week and another thing to go down to 30-50k which is all that many other clubs might be willing to pay for now.
20 million for Henderson would be fantastic business for us. He will never be good enough for us, if this is true we have to sell him
Agreed, it's an okay fee for a GK who will never be good enough, perhaps if he plays week in week out, he can iron out a lot mistakes he makes but that will never happen with us, we should sell with buy back clause.
Does this mean another season of De Gea as undisputed no.1?
What about last season tells you he needs replacing? The guy has been working wonders with horrible CB's and midfielders. Without him we could've been in the Conference if we were lucky.
Even if it was a 20 million sale after the loan, NF would want to pay it in instalments of about 5 million a year.
It’s not going to make much difference to United. So just loan him, make them pay his wages in full and have him come back next season.
It’s not going to make much difference to United. So just loan him, make them pay his wages in full and have him come back next season.
Whether people like it or not, it seems pretty clear that De Gea will be #1 next season given Henderson keeps being linked with a move away while we've seen absolutely zero signs that De Gea will be going anywhere. The De Gea critics (of which I am one) will just have to suck it up for another season at least.
Accepting that, Henderson needs to go. Particularly given the rumours that he was one of the main sources of leaks last season. We don't need an unhappy Henderson in the squad frustrated at not getting a move away.
Obviously ideally we'd sell. Because if he isn't good enough to replace De Gea now then he won't be good enough in the future either. He'll turn 26 next season, he isn't going to get much better than this. And we could obviously do with the money this summer. But if we can't sell and have to loan him then so be it.
And the lesson to take away from the Henderson experiment is that when we do decide to replace De Gea, do it decisively with a top talent.
Accepting that, Henderson needs to go. Particularly given the rumours that he was one of the main sources of leaks last season. We don't need an unhappy Henderson in the squad frustrated at not getting a move away.
Obviously ideally we'd sell. Because if he isn't good enough to replace De Gea now then he won't be good enough in the future either. He'll turn 26 next season, he isn't going to get much better than this. And we could obviously do with the money this summer. But if we can't sell and have to loan him then so be it.
And the lesson to take away from the Henderson experiment is that when we do decide to replace De Gea, do it decisively with a top talent.
This is exactly it. It's the same reason so many players have managed to stay so long because no other club in their right mind will match/come close to the salary we have them on.
And to make matters worse. Woodward kept extending players to inflate club value because they were counted as assets on hand. Thankfully that seems to be a thing of the past.
Nearly every player that City has bought recently has cost 50mil so I am sure that players like Ake, Mendy and we can virtually rate Grealish as a squad player would be on huge money.
Sell for 20m if we can get a buyback clause at 35m.
No matter how I look at this it just do not make sense.
Loan and a low fixed purchase price.
If he is to be sold a for 20 mill it should be this summer in one payment.
If he claims he want to go and his salary is the problem. This is his problem. He can lower his demand in search for playing time to get to the WC or stay as back-up.
If a loan then without a buyout clause or minimum 30-40 mill (we can alway make an agreement for a lower amount for sale next year).
If he make the England national team for the WC he will be worth minimum 30 and if he makes 1st choice it will most likely be 40 mill.
Loan and a low fixed purchase price.
If he is to be sold a for 20 mill it should be this summer in one payment.
If he claims he want to go and his salary is the problem. This is his problem. He can lower his demand in search for playing time to get to the WC or stay as back-up.
If a loan then without a buyout clause or minimum 30-40 mill (we can alway make an agreement for a lower amount for sale next year).
If he make the England national team for the WC he will be worth minimum 30 and if he makes 1st choice it will most likely be 40 mill.
That's kind of how buyback clauses work!!
We wouldn't buy him back if he was rubbish, so obviously his buyback price would be slightly higher than the sale value at the time, but usually lower value than the expected worth if he meets his potential.
Ramsdale is younger, better and alot more games under his belt at top level. 20m sounds fair on a GK like Henderson
Obviously because no one wants to buy him, only loan him.
Little proof in that.
The mere fact that we cannot even get a full fee for a 25 year old goalkeeper with a full premier league season under his belt tells you all you need to know about how pathetic our negotiators are.
Or how bloated the goalkeeper market is? How many clubs would be desperate for a goalkeeper right now?
the fact we are selling the future is what's really worrying. and, for me, the better all round keeper in the squad
- Status