Just seen elsewhere there are tweets out there saying City are preparing a 3rd bid for £45m (40m + add ons).
Oh well, I look forward to the 4th bid. Nearly there.
Oh well, I look forward to the 4th bid. Nearly there.
Raheem Sterling | Signs for Man City for £49,000,000
- Thread starter Brophs
- Start date
- Status
Yeah but you probably think City are a big club so?...
Congratulations for making an entirely moot point.
Another entry in the hypocritical life of Stampy me.
Thanks
If you're so confident, go bet on him not to join City, you'd get very good odds for it.
Last edited:
Thanks
Based on what? I can't see him not moving there at this point.
Their counter attacks will be deadly with him and Aguerro.
Reports suggest latest bid will be turned down & FSG prepared to let him rot in the reserves unless the valuation is met.
PFA reportedly involved too as it seems the little twerp is refusing to go on tour.
PFA reportedly involved too as it seems the little twerp is refusing to go on tour.
If I were City, I would pull out and leave them with the mess. No one else seems to be interested. Either take the £40M now and get rid of the problem, or put him in the reserves and watch his value fall to a big fat zero. LFC are posturing for no reason - it's not like De Gea who is clearly worth what United value him for (if not more) - Sterling is hit and miss and they'd still be making a huge profit.
I find this very funny...
Sure, he's acting like an utter dick and all but, he's taking the piss out of Liverpool and Rodgers.
Plus, I've never seen any player want away as much as this
Sure, he's acting like an utter dick and all but, he's taking the piss out of Liverpool and Rodgers.
Plus, I've never seen any player want away as much as this
What some of you seem to be forgetting is a) QPR will get 20% of any fee, b) 2 years more at LFC on 35k will save us at least 7M in wages on our last contract offer, 12M @ 150k pw, c) we will still pick up an arbitration fee (probably 20M+ since it's based on valuation, training and offers). Our 'loss' would not be 50M, 40M or indeed anything even close.
Your contract offer was £100k a week.
It'd be quite funny to see him rotting in the reserves and to see, what the press would make of it.
With the Euros next summer also, it'd put Woy in a bad position of picking him, as he wouldn't have had a season of competitive football.
With the Euros next summer also, it'd put Woy in a bad position of picking him, as he wouldn't have had a season of competitive football.
I think City will ultimately fork out the requested amount. Or near enough to it.
City should tell Pool to piss off wanted £50m and leave them with a massive problem. They will be in all kinds of trouble if they don't sell reheem, he'll be a poison in the dressing room and I can't see too many other clubs in line for his signature. If City were cute about this they'd get him for under £40m.
LFC are 'posturing' because they have put a value on a player with 2 years left on his contract, who ideally they don't want to sell.
It's nothing to do with De Gea - LFC have placed their value on the player and thus far that has not been met by a club with cash to burn...it really isn't that complicated.
Well that amount has already been turned down supposedly so....it's clear FSG are not going to be bullied into selling at a price below what they value.
I think as the window goes on they would have to consider offers below. At the moment I understand why they are holding out, but the situation seems to be getting worse by the day. I can't see the player playing for the club again, if he refuses to go on tour that him past the point of no return in my eyes. As the new season gets closer I'm sure they would just want rid.
I hate Liverpool but I'm disgusted on how Sterling is treating the club. They've given him this platform to make a name for himself and pay him a decent wage for his age with a fair offer seemingly on the table.
Now every player has the right to want to play elsewhere but they should always be professional about it. I kind of hope his career gets burried wherever he goes. Let's face it he was pretty shit last season anyway.
You sound a bit defensive here
Look, Liverpool has the right to value him at whatever they want- but if your honest, Sterling is not yet the calibre of player that's worth £40 or £50M - I don't care who he plays for, he just isn't. He's also a big disruption in the camp at the moment, so therefore it seems to make more sense to offload him if some fool is willing to pay £40+ million for him.
Also, I used De Gea as a comparison. De Gea is proven and will get better, plus he's already won the league etc. In that case, our valuation for him makes more sense than LFC's for Sterling - who hasn't exactly proved himself yet. So therefore, if you're getting £40+ million for someone who hasn't even performed to justify even half that amount, then that is great business and the club should take it whilst the offer is still there.
You sound a bit defensive here
Look, Liverpool has the right to value him at whatever they want- but if your honest, Sterling is not yet the calibre of player that's worth £40 or £50M - I don't care who he plays for, he just isn't. He's also a big disruption in the camp at the moment, so therefore it seems to make more sense to offload him if some fool is willing to pay £40+ million for him.
Also, I used De Gea as a comparison. De Gea is proven and will get better, plus he's already won the league etc. In that case, our valuation for him makes more sense than LFC's for Sterling - who hasn't exactly proved himself yet. So therefore, if you're getting £40+ million for someone who hasn't even performed to justify even half that amount, then that is great business and the club should take it whilst the offer is still there.
Do I think Sterling is worth £50m
No I don't
However, in value terms to the club he is probably our most expensive asset.
Having sold Suarez last year clearly LFC have put their price on the player and are as it stands sticking to that, bearing in mind the club bidding aren't exactly short of funds.
Also he has 2 years on his contract and do not wish to sell - especially to another premier league club.
I agree he isn't worth that, I also agree De Gea is a world class keeper, but LFC have their price and so far irrespective of what we feel the player is worth, they clearly are holding out for the best price - which they are quite entitled to do. If we feel that price is too high, clearly for them that's irrelevant.
The disruption bit is still ongoing, if he doesn't get sold that is obviously a possible issue, but I am sure the club are looking at that.
If you valued De Gea at say £50m, and City wanted to buy him and you didn't want to sell and were asking £65m - most United fans would be happy with that and telling City where to go.
Last edited:
What he wrote makes sense.
Him being left to rot in the reserves is the ideal scenario really.
It's shite for everyone, the player, the selling club and the buying club. No one gains anything.
Stick to your guns Liverpool. Show him who's boss.
It's shite for everyone, the player, the selling club and the buying club. No one gains anything.
Stick to your guns Liverpool. Show him who's boss.
I am quite aware of that .. which is why I said "will save us at least £7M in wages on our last contract offer", the 3rd figure is if we had conceded to the £150k demand.
Spoken like a true Manc. Causing issues at LFC certainly isn't what is foremost in City's management's minds, if at all. City obviously want him, if they were prepared to pay £43m for Mangala then you know money isn't the issue, just pull another 1000 barrels from the ground.
And i agree LFC can value him at however much. My point is you have to take other circumstances into account in Sterling's particular case. Even if he stays in the reserve or whatever, what's the point? Don't you think your club is losing out more by keeping him where his value will slump to a big fat zero? Wouldn't if be better for the club to make a good profit instead? And £40+ is very very good for a quite frankly underwhelming player without the right mentality. It's gone too far for him to recover his career at Liverpool, so what's the point of the club losing out now by getting any profit they can? Liverpool are not going to look 'weak' in that case. The media and the club itself have pulverised Sterling's reputation (though of course he hasn't helped himself) to such a point that it is universally thought by most football fans, that he's a shithouse who they should get rid of.
So again, what's the point of dragging it out and losing the fee from City.
Also, although City 'can afford' to spend more, it doesn't mean they want to be taken for mugs either. If it carries on any longer, I can totally see them getting fed up and moving on and leaving Liverpool with the mess and no transfer fee.
You know something, I hope Liverpool is not thinking like this, because they will get burned. I have noticed in this window, that City are not looking to pay over the odds. I wouldn't be too confident of that spending whatever you want. It might happen, but just so you understand, there's a very good chance it won't.
I accept that. Clearly if as it stands the price is not met and he stays you have a big issue with an unhappy player.
You have to bear in mind the sell on to QPR also which is a significant amount.
How it will all work out I do not know. However, it's obviously something the club must have considered. As it stands their valuation has not been met.
Clearly with the player due to go on tour tomorrow we may possibly know more over the next week or so.
The financial comments you make I understand where you are coming from, but FSG are surely aware of that too.
We are heavily stocked in positions where he played. Bar troling Liverpool, it would be pointless to go for him (even assuming that Liverpool will be willing to sell him to us, which isn't the case).
Of course I was just being flippant there. However I do think that having strong-willed American owners in FSG, who are quite used to handling powerful players (in terms of reputation or worth), agents and other clubs (or franchises) means they are not willing to acquiesce just because a player/agent throws a tantrum or ten or an uber-rich club is trying to buy a player at less than their valuation. I would not at all be surprised if they were willing to not sell Sterling below their valuation (or they may have privately valued Sterling lower and be happy with the next City bid) ... as they have shown already with Suarez they are confident and strong and willing to risk losing $$$ to set an example for future deals.
Unless you know, Bayern/PSG/Barca/Madrid comes for him in 2 years and you'll get 300k as arbitration fee. And for sure, some clubs from outside of England will be interested for him in that price.
The other points are fair, but running down his contract in the hope of getting a huge arbitration fee is risky.
Fair enough, and I agree with that stance. The only thing is I wasn't aware that Liverpool had become so profitable that they can afford to lose out on a good fee at this moment (I'm not being sarcastic or anything). I was just under the impression that there were some financial constraint at this time for the club. If not then fine.
I'm genuinely surprised liverpool haven't accepted an offer yet. It only seems to be city interested and there are much better 40m players out there (granted not English for the quota).
He'll go on tour because he's contractually obliged to, it's just posturing from him and his increasingly cnut-like agent to make liverpool want to sell.
It will be a long summer for pool and city. But city have the upper hand methinks. Dangerous game from pool if they hold out for 45m plus. If he stays, and is left to rot in reserves then his value will plummet by next summer and pool could lose 20m plus on him in last year of contact.
Also need to remember pool are still looking to buy, they need the sterling money.
He'll go on tour because he's contractually obliged to, it's just posturing from him and his increasingly cnut-like agent to make liverpool want to sell.
It will be a long summer for pool and city. But city have the upper hand methinks. Dangerous game from pool if they hold out for 45m plus. If he stays, and is left to rot in reserves then his value will plummet by next summer and pool could lose 20m plus on him in last year of contact.
Also need to remember pool are still looking to buy, they need the sterling money.
We may not need to buy too much more if we don't sell Sterling and who said we don't have the money ? Statements from LFC would seem to contradict that. We would lose 'some' amount, but I'd say less than most people assume considering our savings on salary and the 20% we'd have to give QPR anyway.
However to compensate we'd get 2 years more out of Sterling that may contribute to us making the Top 4, more than making up for whatever loss there may be. Sterling could not afford not to play to the best of his abilities with the Euros coming up and if he plans on a big move at the end of the 2 years. Not an ideal situation for anyone of course.
You can see why Liverpool are reluctant to sell for any lower - and I think his current low wage is a factor. If he goes for £50m and you factor in the 20% clause with QPR which brings that down to £40m in their pocket, add on a wage increase on the player replacing him from £35k to £100k per week over the remaining two years of his contract (£7m) - then they've only got £33m to splash out on a striker.. Which is about a Benteke in today's market. You're effectively replacing Sterling with Benteke.
Because of his current low wage he's more expensive to replace than simply reinvesting it all into a transfer fee.
Because of his current low wage he's more expensive to replace than simply reinvesting it all into a transfer fee.
You're betting on Sterling being rational. He doesn't seem to be the brightest, and he seems to be a cnut of the highest order. Even in last season, since the contract talk started, he was very average and his play was very affected.
Both Liverpool and City are having the right stance (Liverpool wanting far more money than City offers; City not wanting to overpay) so we'll see who changes the strategy first. It is quite similar to De Gea situation, but De Gea is very professional and United can afford to lose money. Liverpool on the other side need those money more and Sterling isn't a very professional player.
What's wrong with trolling Pool? Lol
People with money normally have it because they use it wisely. There must come a point when City start thinking you're asking too much and just become willing to wait it out, knowing that keeping Sterling at Liverpool isn't really an option and that Liverpool will probably be willing to sell at a lower price later in the window. It's not about giving you a problem, more about them getting a better deal.
Sterling isn't worth anything close to £50m.
Well if we were thinking of Depay as a central striker at times then Sterling one side and Wilson another might be a great trio down the line. I don't think Liverpool really want him to rot in the reserves and risk United getting to him.
City are obviously going to pay the £50m they need Sterling and Liverpool know that so it makes no sense for them to back down. At the end of the day Liverpool have been quite reasonable with this imo, they've made it clear for ages now that they value him at £50m, if someone bids that he's gone, if not he stays, City keep making these offers which are lower than that and expect Liverpool to cave in but they've shown they won't do that as they were in a similar situation two years ago with Suarez. The fact City pay over the odds for most of there players and that they need young, homegrown players means there in a weaker position here so to me it's just about Liverpool hanging on till City get desperate, which they will given this was their "final bid" which is funny considering that two weeks ago they made a bid which was supposed to be the last they'd make for him.
- Status