Jump to content

BREAKING - Wednesday turn down £1MILLION for Windass


Recommended Posts

Just now, bedfordowl said:

Not having a pop at all but. How does he seemingly not want to be here Have I missed something? Or is this just about an emoji on Twitter?

People with negative outlooks and vivid imaginations.  It doesn’t help that the club keep everything close to their chest which causes endless speculation and trips down rabbit holes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Manwë said:

It's called the Chansiri paradox and it was invented in Sheffield.  Where four seesaws are pivoted on the same point, and all 4 ends have to go up at the same time for it to work.


Surely 4 seesaws would have 8 ends?

Typical Wednesday to double the trouble.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bigash_swfc said:

Millwall won't be able to match his current wage or bonus package. 


To be fair I would expect them to comfortably beat his league one salary & bonuses. Whether one of the other clubs allegedly interested would get closer to his championship salary is another matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Therealrealist

So that looks like borner and windass we are going to hold here against their will...im sure they will still perform to their best tho every satday...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, shezzas left peg said:

I've a feeling Dc maybe paying the players we need to keep or would raise a reasonable fee. Iorfa, Windass bazza etc.. Would be criminal, yet just like Dc to let our only saleable assets walk for free due to unpaid wages. 

You have a feeling DC is using common sense.😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kirksandallowl said:


We wouldn’t have had the £400k either, they wanted an instalment plan. Sounds like a great deal to me. 

I'm happy to be corrected but I'm pretty sure almost all transfers are conducted this way.

 

The reason we got Windass for £500k was because Wigan had £400k left to pay for him, hence why Wigan couldn't sell him any cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Manwë said:

I'm happy to be corrected but I'm pretty sure almost all transfers are conducted this way.

 

The reason we got Windass for £500k was because Wigan had £400k left to pay for him, hence why Wigan couldn't sell him any cheaper.


Yep normally so. Makes it even less likely to help our financial situation wouldn’t you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't there a story about a player having to track Chansiri down to a hotel to force him to sell him? Judging by the time period I suspect it was Jack Hunt.

 

It's beyond obvious that Borner should be allowed to leave and if we can get north of a million for Windass that's also approaching no-brainer territory.

 

Probably all the more reason they'll both spend the next season wondering they can be bothered to turn up to train with our reserves. DC has such a weird complex about letting players leave. Alarm bells should have been ringing when we turned down £10m for Forestieri.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kirksandallowl said:


Yep normally so. Makes it even less likely to help our financial situation wouldn’t you agree?

Not especially makes any difference I would have thought.  If standard practice is payment over years, then it'd take something exceptional to warrant a club paying it all up front.  Windass and Millwall are far from exceptional.  

 

The way I see it, it's a liability off the books in terms of wages, a profit made on a transfer, and it helps produce s positive balance even if it doesn't touch the sides, then we should be going for it.  The more the better but I don't suddenly believe Chansiri has overnight figured out how to operate on the transfer market. If we can't or won't make money from genuinely saleable assets, we sure as hell are not going to make any from the dross left over, and the bills still keep rolling in.

 

The risk remains, that unless we start paying wages, then we could lose assets for £0.  We have to pay the wages, we have to reduce the liabilities.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great, The club turn down a bid of £400,000 and immediately see it more than doubled.

 

So…..expect  higher bids for an attacking midfielder who can contribute 10/15 Championship goals per season. Surely worth £2 to £3 million to clubs with parachute cash. And if Chnsiri’s got it wrong we keep him to score more in L1.

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, kirksandallowl said:


To be fair I would expect them to comfortably beat his league one salary & bonuses. Whether one of the other clubs allegedly interested would get closer to his championship salary is another matter. 

 

I can't understand what you're saying.

 

His wages and bonuses won't have been halfed by the drop in leagues.

 

I believe he'll be content here but if top end Championship clubs come in, he will go. 

 

I can see Sheffield United sniffing around soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bigash_swfc said:

 

I can't understand what you're saying.

 

His wages and bonuses won't have been halfed by the drop in leagues.

 

I believe he'll be content here but if top end Championship clubs come in, he will go. 

 

I can see Sheffield United sniffing around soon.


Maybe not halved but he will have had a significant reduction upon relegation.   I believe even Millwall could comfortably match his reduced wage but if say Forrest were in for him then he would likely get offered closer to his championship salary than Millwall could manage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...