£50m For AWB Is A Steal
#1
I have always tried to not be biased towards Palace so I have to be as fair or critical of our players as any others.

AWB has played 42 league games for us and one full season. To get £50m for him is crazy so I think we have to accept it as I don't think he is worth that much.

I know that won't be a popular view. I said the same about Harry Kane when he had his first good season for Spurs. I said people should come back and see me when he has had 3 good seasons. The same is true for AWB. There have been plenty of players have a good season be it for us or other teams.

That said I'd prefer we kept him but the offer is too good to refuse. I thought we'd get £20m and clauses for international appearances and a sell on fee.

The other thing to consider is it looks like Alexander Arnold will take over the England right back spot and won't be removed unless another player who players for a top 6 side comes along. There isn't one currently, Walker is past his best.

With that in mind AWB could get fed up and declare for DR Congo, he has already played for them at U20 level. If that happens his value will decrease. He is currently thought of as an England player which adds to his value.

As I said, this won't be a popular opinion but I hope with the money we could buy 3 decent players but with Freedman in charge of transfers I think we'll blow it... After the Americans take their cut.
Reply
#2
https://www.footballinsider247.com/hell-...nited-bid/

Given the prices for absolute dross these days I think I agree.  Even free transfers want huge signing on fees.  Probably why we gave Wickham a new contract and are reportedly offering Souare one.
Reply
#3
So, multiple newspapers are reporting that AWB has asked to be able to move to Man United though he has not put in a formal transfer request.

Has he the right, after one season, to put a demand in to the club like that? If it were Wilf we all might accept it after 5 years service since he came back but after just one season?

If it is true then it's shitty, especially as he has been with us since 2009 (signed under Jordan) and you'd think he'd have an affinity with Palace.
Reply
#4
(12-06-2019, 11:07 AM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: So, multiple newspapers are reporting that AWB has asked to be able to move to Man United though he has not put in a formal transfer request.

Has he the right, after one season, to put a demand in to the club like that? If it were Wilf we all might accept it after 5 years service since he came back but after just one season?

If it is true then it's shitty, especially as he has been with us since 2009 (signed under Jordan) and you'd think he'd have an affinity with Palace.

I don't believe aword the press say. Some of these stories come from people who want to make a transfer happen.

I wholeheartedly believe that we should keep Bissaka for the sake of the clubs future.
Goodbye European Union. Goodbye Jeremy. Goodbye Nick. Jerk-It Goodbye Comrades.
Reply
#5
(12-06-2019, 11:31 AM)Talons Wrote: I don't believe aword the press say. Some of these stories come from people who want to make a transfer happen.

I wholeheartedly believe that we should keep Bissaka for the sake of the clubs future.

I sympathise with your view but I think this ship has sailed. If it were just one paper I would dismiss it but it is quite a few from different sides of the spectrum. Club and player are quiet so that says a lot and it seems we need the money.
Reply
#6
I think if we can get £50m+ we should sell. Ideally hold out for £60m.

We have two decent RBs already in Kelly and Ward, and we could do with strengthening other areas of the team such as up-front.
Reply
#7
(12-06-2019, 11:31 AM)Talons Wrote: I don't believe aword the press say. Some of these stories come from people who want to make a transfer happen.

I wholeheartedly believe that we should keep Bissaka for the sake of the clubs future.

Me too.  The only way we should sell any of our better players is if they want away.  No point keeping an unhappy player.  The risk is that Wilf and AWB both want to move.  We will bank over 100 million but what good is that if the scouts can't identify as good replacements that want to come to Palace.  It's a depressing never ending story.  If we could somehow keep them and show them ambition for once I believe we could finally achieve something.  But I suspect we will dither and in the meantime the big clubs will move in and sign at least one of them.  Both if we are unlucky.
Reply
#8
(12-06-2019, 22:28 PM)elgin eagle Wrote: Me too.  The only way we should sell any of our better players is if they want away.  No point keeping an unhappy player.  The risk is that Wilf and AWB both want to move.  We will bank over 100 million but what good is that if the scouts can't identify as good replacements that want to come to Palace.  It's a depressing never ending story.  If we could somehow keep them and show them ambition for once I believe we could finally achieve something.  But I suspect we will dither and in the meantime the big clubs will move in and sign at least one of them.  Both if we are unlucky.

There are a few things going on. Firstly is the view that we can't afford to buy any players because all our money goes on wages. That means we have to sell to buy. The other is that the player wants to move, now that a bid has come in.

I'm of the same view as you but if we really don't have any money to buy players then we have to sell and given that 18 months ago we didn't have this asset (he was just a youth player) then it is suddenly like someone has dropped £60m on our laps.

I don't for a minute think all the money will go on the squad and I also don't think AWB is worth the money mentioned.

Put the boot on the other foot and even a striker who scores 20 goals in his first season isn't thought of as a £60m player so I am amazed AWB is. Nobody quoted that money for Kane, Dele or Rashford after their first full season.

In the perfect world I'd keep him but the money is too good.
Reply
#9
(12-06-2019, 23:52 PM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: There are a few things going on. Firstly is the view that we can't afford to buy any players because all our money goes on wages. That means we have to sell to buy. The other is that the player wants to move, now that a bid has come in.

I'm of the same view as you but if we really don't have any money to buy players then we have to sell and given that 18 months ago we didn't have this asset (he was just a youth player) then it is suddenly like someone has dropped £60m on our laps.

I don't for a minute think all the money will go on the squad and I also don't think AWB is worth the money mentioned.

Put the boot on the other foot and even a striker who scores 20 goals in his first season isn't thought of as a £60m player so I am amazed AWB is. Nobody quoted that money for Kane, Dele or Rashford after their first full season.

In the perfect world I'd keep him but the money is too good.

Can't argue with that
Reply
#10
(12-06-2019, 23:52 PM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: There are a few things going on. Firstly is the view that we can't afford to buy any players because all our money goes on wages. That means we have to sell to buy. The other is that the player wants to move, now that a bid has come in.

I'm of the same view as you but if we really don't have any money to buy players then we have to sell and given that 18 months ago we didn't have this asset (he was just a youth player) then it is suddenly like someone has dropped £60m on our laps.

I don't for a minute think all the money will go on the squad and I also don't think AWB is worth the money mentioned.

Put the boot on the other foot and even a striker who scores 20 goals in his first season isn't thought of as a £60m player so I am amazed AWB is. Nobody quoted that money for Kane, Dele or Rashford after their first full season.

In the perfect world I'd keep him but the money is too good.

When I watch the team on a Saturday, I am not interested in how much money we have. Most of money will not go to strengthing the team or we would not be selling in the first place.
There is more to this than simple book balancing. This is about the image of the club and it's Premier League survival. Everything hinges on that.
Goodbye European Union. Goodbye Jeremy. Goodbye Nick. Jerk-It Goodbye Comrades.
Reply
#11
(12-06-2019, 23:52 PM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: There are a few things going on. Firstly is the view that we can't afford to buy any players because all our money goes on wages. That means we have to sell to buy. The other is that the player wants to move, now that a bid has come in.

I'm of the same view as you but if we really don't have any money to buy players then we have to sell and given that 18 months ago we didn't have this asset (he was just a youth player) then it is suddenly like someone has dropped £60m on our laps.

I don't for a minute think all the money will go on the squad and I also don't think AWB is worth the money mentioned.

Put the boot on the other foot and even a striker who scores 20 goals in his first season isn't thought of as a £60m player so I am amazed AWB is. Nobody quoted that money for Kane, Dele or Rashford after their first full season.

In the perfect world I'd keep him but the money is too good.

I understand your point of view.  It is good money but he has the potential to be excellent.  Man United will probably still end up making millions out of them when he leaves them to join a big club.  I suppose none of us really know the state of our finances or the level of our ambition.  The level of yank investment is questionable too.  All we have to go on is former history which suggests we can't hang onto our best players when we want to progress.  I'd love to see us start the season with AWB, Wilf, Batshuayi and a proper crosser like Albrighton, but can't see it happening.  I guess when it comes to Palace prospects I feel we have a ceiling we always struggle to climb higher than.  Hopefully they prove me wrong and manage it this summer.  If they do, the form at the end of the season suggests we might be in for a good one with a good transfer window and no sales.
Reply
#12
(13-06-2019, 13:41 PM)Talons Wrote: When I watch the team on a Saturday, I am not interested in how much money we have. Most of money will not go to strengthing the team or we would not be selling in the first place.
There is more to this than simple book balancing. This is about the image of the club and it's Premier League survival. Everything hinges on that.

The problem is we can't afford to buy anything if we don't sell and if we don't invest then we will go down. We saw what happened last season and our final position flattered to deceive in my opinion.

(13-06-2019, 16:43 PM)elgin eagle Wrote: I understand your point of view.  It is good money but he has the potential to be excellent.  Man United will probably still end up making millions out of them when he leaves them to join a big club.  I suppose none of us really know the state of our finances or the level of our ambition.  The level of yank investment is questionable too.  All we have to go on is former history which suggests we can't hang onto our best players when we want to progress.  I'd love to see us start the season with AWB, Wilf, Batshuayi and a proper crosser like Albrighton, but can't see it happening.  I guess when it comes to Palace prospects I feel we have a ceiling we always struggle to climb higher than.  Hopefully they prove me wrong and manage it this summer.  If they do, the form at the end of the season suggests we might be in for a good one with a good transfer window and no sales.

Our finances are published for us to see, we made a loss of £30m in the last published accounts. I think it said 85% of our income goes on wages so there is only £10m-£15m a year for transfers so unless we go into the red.

I would prefer we didn't sell anyone but the harsh truth is we've been lied to before about transfers. For example the summer we bought Benteke we were told we didn't need to sell Bolasie to find the deal. We were told we wanted to keep him but that summer we spend £11m net on players.

We bought Tomkins, Mandanda, Townsend and Benteke and sold we sold Gayle, Jedi and Bolasie. We were then told the owners had to loan the club money to spend £38m in the January on Schlupp, PvA, Luka and Sakho on loan. That is why on the last accounts we made a loss.

So if we didn't need to sell Bolasie to buy Benteke how would we have been able to afford him? The accounts would have read a almost £60m loss for that year.

The summer FdB came in we spend £8 on Riedewald and almost £30m on Sakho. Last summer we spend £8m on the guy from West Ham plus free transfers and loans.

All this indicates we 'only' have about £10m to spend this summer unless we sell and I don't like to think how we'll do this season without buying decent players.
Reply
#13
(13-06-2019, 17:09 PM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: The problem is we can't afford to buy anything if we don't sell and if we don't invest then we will go down. We saw what happened last season and our final position flattered to deceive in my opinion.


I'm think we can survive as long as we get a couple of good loans but offloading Benteke would really help.

We need another centre half and a striker. If we sell Bissaka we will need a right back as well.

I just don't think that selling your best quality is ever the answer if you can't repace it.
Goodbye European Union. Goodbye Jeremy. Goodbye Nick. Jerk-It Goodbye Comrades.
Reply
#14
(13-06-2019, 17:58 PM)Talons Wrote: I'm think we can survive as long as we get a couple of good loans but offloading Benteke would really help.

We need another centre half and a striker. If we sell Bissaka we will need a right back as well.

I just don't think that selling your best quality is ever the answer if you can't repace it.

I agree about Benteke but he ain't going anywhere.

The funny thing is we'd be better off, financially, selling Wilf than AWB because of the wages he's on. AWB is on a pittance in comparison as he is probably on his original contract signed before he broke into the team.
Reply
#15
(13-06-2019, 17:09 PM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: The problem is we can't afford to buy anything if we don't sell and if we don't invest then we will go down. We saw what happened last season and our final position flattered to deceive in my opinion.


Our finances are published for us to see, we made a loss of £30m in the last published accounts. I think it said 85% of our income goes on wages so there is only £10m-£15m a year for transfers so unless we go into the red.

I would prefer we didn't sell anyone but the harsh truth is we've been lied to before about transfers. For example the summer we bought Benteke we were told we didn't need to sell Bolasie to find the deal. We were told we wanted to keep him but that summer we spend £11m net on players.

We bought Tomkins, Mandanda, Townsend and Benteke and sold we sold Gayle, Jedi and Bolasie. We were then told the owners had to loan the club money to spend £38m in the January on Schlupp, PvA, Luka and Sakho on loan. That is why on the last accounts we made a loss.

So if we didn't need to sell Bolasie to buy Benteke how would we have been able to afford him? The accounts would have read a almost £60m loss for that year.

The summer FdB came in we spend £8 on Riedewald and almost £30m on Sakho. Last summer we spend £8m on the guy from West Ham plus free transfers and loans.

All this indicates we 'only' have about £10m to spend this summer unless we sell and I don't like to think how we'll do this season without buying decent players.

I know we did spend big under Allardyce but the players we signed did at least make a difference.  Roy has hardly been backed at all but has really turned us round on the pitch after the De boer weirdness.   I would hope the yanks release the purse strings and stop just using the armchair money.  He deserves to be backed, arguably deserved to be backed 3 transfer windows ago.  We need to hold onto wilf and AWB though if possible.  You can see why wilf hates playing against him in training.  If he does manage to get past him, a telescopic leg appears and clears everything into touch.  You can't get quality like that.  Well we can't anyway.
Reply
#16
(13-06-2019, 18:29 PM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: I agree about Benteke but he ain't going anywhere.

The funny thing is we'd be better off, financially, selling Wilf than AWB because of the wages he's on. AWB is on a pittance in comparison as he is probably on his original contract signed before he broke into the team.

Not an option. That will put us in the Championship for sure.
Goodbye European Union. Goodbye Jeremy. Goodbye Nick. Jerk-It Goodbye Comrades.
Reply
#17
(13-06-2019, 19:25 PM)Talons Wrote: Not an option. That will put us in the Championship for sure.
The rise in transfer fees year on year and combined with his age I think we will get 50mill if we negotiate waiving the Wilf sell on clause,otherwise I’d rate him at 65 million in a straight deal terms.
If he repeats last season at manure he’ll be worth more and maybe the real big boys will come calling.
Reply
#18
(13-06-2019, 19:09 PM)elgin eagle Wrote: I know we did spend big under Allardyce but the players we signed did at least make a difference.  Roy has hardly been backed at all but has really turned us round on the pitch after the De boer weirdness.   I would hope the yanks release the purse strings and stop just using the armchair money.  He deserves to be backed, arguably deserved to be backed 3 transfer windows ago.  We need to hold onto wilf and AWB though if possible.  You can see why wilf hates playing against him in training.  If he does manage to get past him, a telescopic leg appears and clears everything into touch.  You can't get quality like that.  Well we can't anyway.

I understand what you say and this is a subject that comes up time and time again. People think either the Yanks can throw money at the transfer market or if we get bought by a gazillionaire and they can buy players but those days are gone. What happened at Chelsea will never happen again, why don't you think a club like Bournemouth have been bought by an overseas group?

The Yanks, two multi-billionaires, can't open their wallet as it goes against FFP. Manchester City are about to be disqualified from the Champions League for breaking it, Bournemouth have been fined tens of millions in the past and QPR have been fined £50m last year.

As things stand the two Yanks and Parish lent the club money when Big Sam was in charge. As I understand it owners can loan money (directors loan or something) but can't give the club money. They 'invested' to make a profit and so far, if everything is to be believed, they have paid £100m to buy into the club (ring fenced for the new stand) and lent £30m which needs to be paid back.

As we (apparently) only have £10m-£15m a season after wages out of the £130m we receive we are financially fucked until we can increase income via higher match day receipts or winning major prize money. If they keep on lending the club money we will go tits up again because to get their money back they will asset strip, maybe even sell the ground, to get their investment.
Reply
#19
(14-06-2019, 00:47 AM)The Expat Eagle Wrote: I understand what you say and this is a subject that comes up time and time again. People think either the Yanks can throw money at the transfer market or if we get bought by a gazillionaire and they can buy players but those days are gone. What happened at Chelsea will never happen again, why don't you think a club like Bournemouth have been bought by an overseas group?

The Yanks, two multi-billionaires, can't open their wallet as it goes against FFP. Manchester City are about to be disqualified from the Champions League for breaking it, Bournemouth have been fined tens of millions in the past and QPR have been fined £50m last year.

As things stand the two Yanks and Parish lent the club money when Big Sam was in charge. As I understand it owners can loan money (directors loan or something) but can't give the club money. They 'invested' to make a profit and so far, if everything is to be believed, they have paid £100m to buy into the club (ring fenced for the new stand) and lent £30m which needs to be paid back.

As we (apparently) only have £10m-£15m a season after wages out of the £130m we receive we are financially fucked until we can increase income via higher match day receipts or winning major prize money. If they keep on lending the club money we will go tits up again because to get their money back they will asset strip, maybe even sell the ground, to get their investment.

Which only leaves player sales as our source of generating income.  Back to square 1 again.  However this assumes that 19 other clubs will also have a small budget for new players due to ffp, which we know is a lie, some with have much much more, and not just those with big stadiums.  I think Bournemouth have a rich owner already, but can't remember who he is.  They probably feel the trade off between fines or success makes it worth it, when competing in such an unfair and corrupt competition, against clubs who regularly bid 50 million for one player.  I think we start a new cycle of ffp this season, so it will be interesting to see if we stick or twist.  The price of players is ridiculous though, and don't even get me started on the wage bill, which is hamstringing everything now.
Reply
#20
(14-06-2019, 01:25 AM)elgin eagle Wrote: Which only leaves player sales as our source of generating income.  Back to square 1 again.  However this assumes that 19 other clubs will also have a small budget for new players due to ffp, which we know is a lie, some with have much much more, and not just those with big stadiums.  I think Bournemouth have a rich owner already, but can't remember who he is.  They probably feel the trade off between fines or success makes it worth it, when competing in such an unfair and corrupt competition, against clubs who regularly bid 50 million for one player.  I think we start a new cycle of ffp this season, so it will be interesting to see if we stick or twist.  The price of players is ridiculous though, and don't even get me started on the wage bill, which is hamstringing everything now.

Bournemouth have been fined once for breaking FFP. Newly promoted clubs have £130m to spend. The thing you might be overlooking is how much we pay in wages. We're the 8th in the league but maybe are 17th for attendance with only Watford, Burnley and Bournemouth with smaller grounds.

There lies the problem. We can look at those 3 clubs and how they spend money. Watford are owned by a family who own other clubs and they are feeding clubs for Watford. Burnley are pretty much skint as are Bournemouth. For me it is those 3 clubs we are competing with when it comes to how much we spend. If they spend more than us then questions do have to be asked.

I won't go into the last few seasons but last season the clubs did the following transfers.

Club                             Bought                                  Sold                                    Loans In           Loans Out

Bournemouth              £42.5m (+2 undisclosed)      £10m (+3 undisclosed)        2 players          23 players         
Burnley                        £0m (+3 undisclosed)          £0m (+2 undisclosed)           0 players          15 players
Watford                       £16.3m (+6 undisclosed)     £44m (+6 undisclosed)         0 players          28 players
Crystal Palace               £9.5m (+0 undisclosed)       £0m (+2 undisclosed)          3 players           13 players

I know that is only for last season but looking at that we are directly comparable to Burnley which indicates Sean Dyche is out next manager. Smile
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)