It is happening again

[horsefly 4,287]

2 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

He’s worth what the market dictates.

Remind me what you said about the fee we got for Buendia.

[LondonCanary 12]

Foolish to conclude on transfer business with the window open.

[Capt. Pants 4,195]

Well if the Sun On Sunday have actually got this wrong (shock horror) and Billing does come here, it will be interesting to see what the reaction on here is! I would have thought he is higher up the list, than bottom. 

[Badger 2,405]

40 minutes ago, Justin time said:

55 minutes ago, Badger said:

Come on DCB - others have expressed an interest too! The price might go up from £22,000 to £25,000!

Now's the time to prove your ambishun!

Don’t invite him. I am not prepared to get involved in a Dutch auction.

Sorry JT, I have to sell to the highest bidder, and as we know price is no object to DCB! (I could offer you a bit of commission though to bid it up a bit 🤫)

[Indy 3,283]

6 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Well if the Sun On Sunday have actually got this wrong (shock horror) and Billing does come here, it will be interesting to see what the reaction on here is! I would have thought he is higher up the list, than bottom. 

Billing would fit our requirements nicely as would have Ajer, but if true the combined 32 million fees is way outside our budget, it’s not that they weren’t our first choice, they are in our range of transfer targets and to think there’s better out there which would want to come here without massive salaries if fooling themselves. We don’t have the pulling power of a London club or the money to pay the wage.

I’m very happy to see us get Billing if we can.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

2 hours ago, Alex Moss said:

It is a very good point indeed. Who’s after Billing? Doesn’t appear clubs are falling over themselves to get to his signature does it? And for all the talk of Ajer, he’s ended up at Brentford! What happened to Leicester, AC Milan and Newcastle, Red Bull Leipzig and Bayer Leverkusen - all put to the sword by plucky little Brentford! Something tells me his agent was somewhat busy leaking made up interested parties to the press in order to get a better fee for himself and his client…

It’s not about Billing or Ajer specifically is it. I’m not that fussed about either. It’s (1) the fact that regardless of what we think of those players the club wanted them but could not compete with Brentford (or in the case of Billing it appears offer enough to get him) but more than that (2) addressing the key areas I think all fans expected to see addressed in a timely fashion. If the players we get in are good I don’t care if they are expensive or cheap but at present their seem to be hints we may not get them. 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

50 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Remind me what you said about the fee we got for Buendia.

We didn’t hold out or trigger an auction. We basically sold to the first chunky bid because as always we have a cash flow issue following promotion and needed the money for signings.

that fee will look poor by the end of this transfer window. 

 

[TheGunnShow 5,932]

20 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

We didn’t hold out or trigger an auction. We basically sold to the first chunky bid because as always we have a cash flow issue following promotion and needed the money for signings.

that fee will look poor by the end of this transfer window. 

 

Eh?

Atletico were interested but couldn't afford him due to financial issues. Arsenal didn't think he was worth it as they bought Ben White for £50million. No-one else came for him.

That fee looks about right. If he'd been English, and therefore been subject to the homegrown premium for UK players in this market, then sure, it would have looked poor. On top of that, we've literally hauled in two new first-team starters in Rashica and Lees-Melou, and got a third in on loan in Gilmour.

Even if an auction had yielded an extra ten million, we probably would have seen the likes of Rashica and Lees-Melou gone and not got them in. We'd then be shopping in the last-ditch saloon on third-choice targets across the board.

[hogesar 9,618]

4 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

I really don't think too many will say that with such a degree of authority as you hoggy especially after the Webber interview over the BK8 sponsorship.

Well, I am saying it...

[Canaries north 151]

We still have time to make some signings. We got promoted with 3 loan players 2 of whom we were obliged to buy (I would of anyway) and one who we might not see again. This was a great tactic to get promoted while lowering financial risks but has in my mind left us on the back foot. We needed to improve from the team we ended the season with and had already spent £18 odd million and become weaker. Yes we have signed some good players but also sold in my personal opinion a great player. Amount spent does not necessarily match the ability of the player but is normally a good sign. I believe at the moment we are break even on outgoings and incoming. I do feel we need at least 2 players minimum. To get the quality I think we need £30 million should do it but the problem we keep hitting looks like wages. Is billings the player we need I don't know but I am sure we won't match the wages he is on at Bournemouth and there is the problem. Players who already have a  premier League salary will probably have to take a pay cut to join us. That says it's foreign league players who are on less wages but are more of a gamble.  As said at the start we still have time and I hope the club plugs the holes that need plugging. 

[birchfest 397]

1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

It’s not about Billing or Ajer specifically is it. I’m not that fussed about either. It’s (1) the fact that regardless of what we think of those players the club wanted them but could not compete with Brentford (or in the case of Billing it appears offer enough to get him) but more than that (2) addressing the key areas I think all fans expected to see addressed in a timely fashion. If the players we get in are good I don’t care if they are expensive or cheap but at present their seem to be hints we may not get them. 

Urm what? That’s not what happened at all, we made one bid at what we felt was his value back in May, they rejected it and we appeared not interested to offer any more. Now to say we couldn't afford the extra that Brentford then eventually put up, 3 months after our only bid, is a tad naive, especially when we put 10 million on the table then and have since gone on to spend 3 million on LML and are still in for Billing which is going to be somewhere around the 10 mark.

 

It’s simple, we think he’s worth 10 million but not a penny more. We moved on. Why should we bend over and let clubs take us for a ride just because we have the money? To be honest I think it’s Brentford who have taken the slightly more reckless gamble here.

[horsefly 4,287]

51 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

We didn’t hold out or trigger an auction. We basically sold to the first chunky bid because as always we have a cash flow issue following promotion and needed the money for signings.

that fee will look poor by the end of this transfer window. 

 

So you're saying every team apart from Villa were unaware Buendia might be available, despite Norwich's very public declaration of its self funding model. You're also saying that reports of bids from Arsenal were entirely false. You're also saying that all the other clubs interested in Buendia simply stood by and let Villa buy him for a price well below their own valuation. Do you realise how ridiculous that sounds? Interest in Buendia has been on-going for well over a year since our relegation from the PL. If we had sold him at that point, as just about every pundit speculated we would have to, we would have got nowhere near what we got for him this summer, so we certainly did indeed "hold out" for over a year. Why not just admit that your phrase " He's worth what the market dictates" holds just as much of our players as any other club's. Otherwise we might just suspect you're attempting to find any old arbitrary excuse to bash the club.

[Badger 2,405]

13 hours ago, horsefly said:

So you're saying every team apart from Villa were unaware Buendia might be available, ... You're also saying that all the other clubs interested in Buendia simply stood by and let Villa buy him for a price well below their own valuation. Do you realise how ridiculous that sounds?

I think he probably does at heart, even if he won't admit it...

Interest in Buendia has been on-going for well over a year since our relegation from the PL. If we had sold him at that point, as just about every pundit speculated we would have to, we would have got nowhere near what we got for him this summer, so we certainly did indeed "hold out" for over a year.

Again, for some reason the usual suspects refuse to acknowledge this...

Otherwise we might just suspect you're attempting to find any old arbitrary excuse to bash the club.

Are there any other possible explanations? Genuine question.

 

[WSM 62]

Re the Billing potentially happy in the Championship rumour - do you all remember last year James Nursey of the Mirror (Or A Nixon of the Sun - can't quite remember now) wrote an article saying that Ben Gibson was going to snub Norwich as he didn't want to move down south and wanted to go back to Boro - what happened with that one?!

[Badger 2,405]

9 minutes ago, WSM said:

Re the Billing potentially happy in the Championship rumour - do you all remember last year James Nursey of the Mirror (Or A Nixon of the Sun - can't quite remember now) wrote an article saying that Ben Gibson was going to snub Norwich as he didn't want to move down south and wanted to go back to Boro - what happened with that one?!

This is a key point - we are feeding off scraps and have no real idea of the situation. This is why the original assertion by the OP is such nonsense.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

14 hours ago, horsefly said:

So you're saying every team apart from Villa were unaware Buendia might be available, despite Norwich's very public declaration of its self funding model. You're also saying that reports of bids from Arsenal were entirely false. You're also saying that all the other clubs interested in Buendia simply stood by and let Villa buy him for a price well below their own valuation. Do you realise how ridiculous that sounds? Interest in Buendia has been on-going for well over a year since our relegation from the PL. If we had sold him at that point, as just about every pundit speculated we would have to, we would have got nowhere near what we got for him this summer, so we certainly did indeed "hold out" for over a year. Why not just admit that your phrase " He's worth what the market dictates" holds just as much of our players as any other club's. Otherwise we might just suspect you're attempting to find any old arbitrary excuse to bash the club.

I think you’ve more than adequately replied to Jim in a fashion fair better than I could have, Horsefly, cheers (can’t like the post because of these ongoing forum issues).

[Alex Moss 2,165]

16 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

It’s not about Billing or Ajer specifically is it. I’m not that fussed about either. It’s (1) the fact that regardless of what we think of those players the club wanted them but could not compete with Brentford (or in the case of Billing it appears offer enough to get him) but more than that (2) addressing the key areas I think all fans expected to see addressed in a timely fashion. If the players we get in are good I don’t care if they are expensive or cheap but at present their seem to be hints we may not get them. 

How do you know Billing is a TOP target, Jim? Same with Ajer, just the one bid in May. You failed to answer my question as to why Newcastle etc all pulled out too, or was it exclusively a Norwich thing?

Or are these just the ones who’s names are out, and are players we like, but are not first choice though we’d take a punt if said players were available for a fee worth gambling on?

In short, you have assumed that these are top targets in order to bash the club yet again. There is no actual evidence that this is the case, and anyway, it seems most of our signings come literally from nowhere.

I would listen to Stuart Webber more if I were you, than get your knickers in a twist over the little we do know compared to the other 95% we don’t.

Some of the players we WANT will not be feasible for whatever reason until later in the window, such as when clubs can’t hold out for the money they want in desperation to recoup lost money due to Covid. Webber has stated this very very clearly, so the likes of me really shouldn’t have to be telling you this AGAIN.

[hogesar 9,618]

4 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

How do you know Billing is a TOP target, Jim? Same with Ajer, just the one bid in May. You failed to answer my question as to why Newcastle etc all pulled out too, or was it exclusively a Norwich thing?

I don't know if some of the posters are saying they're our top targets just for an excuse to attack the club, but regardless they're making a big mistake of assuming that any transfer target made public is therefore a top one.

I think Rashica was probably more of a top target than either of those two and we knew nothing about it.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

5 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I don't know if some of the posters are saying they're our top targets just for an excuse to attack the club, but regardless they're making a big mistake of assuming that any transfer target made public is therefore a top one.

I think Rashica was probably more of a top target than either of those two and we knew nothing about it.

Exactly, C - I think the key thing is that when you hear ‘we understand this is a player they like’, that doesn’t necessarily mean much at all. How many of these players that we ‘like’ have come through the door? How far down the transfer list are they? If at all? Is it fair the club should cop it from the likes of Dean Coney and Jim Smith based on rumours from reporters? Of course not, it takes the p155 to be honest.

The press may be fed some details but the simple fact is that the likes Rashica, Lees-Melou, none of us had a clue in the slightest. Completely out of nowhere. The fact is we clearly only tell the press what we want them to know and not what we don’t, as proven by those signings, and many more before them. It seems the gullible are really getting sucked in that the transfer window is exactly as they read it on the transfer rumours page (which is meant to be a bit of fun more than anything). 

[Alex Moss 2,165]

Btw, if any of the usual suspects would like to name one, and I mean just one, Premier League club that has concluded all business already this transfer window, then I’d love to hear who! Or is just Norwich that are finished?

Why have Man City not signed their rumoured top targets yet, Kane and Haaland? Should their fans be cr@pping their load because they’ve not got the deals over the line yet? It must be a real concern to their fans they have not delivered on these yet…

[Flying Dutchman 744]

22 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

The record signing cost a fraction of the record sale. So that was, on paper, a backwards not forwards step. 

Was it a backwards step when we sold Maddison for £24m and signed Emi for £1.5m then (followed by 2 promotions in 3 years??

[TheGunnShow 5,932]

I think that just shows that any old **** can be conjured up on paper. 😉

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

On 25/07/2021 at 13:14, Jim Smith said:

I am concerned by the sound bites starting to come out hinting at settling for what we’ve got in certain areas or “playing the long game.”

we needed these guys in and bedded into the team.

Agreed.

"playing the long game" translates roughly into "leaving it late", which is how panic signings happen.

And when looking back at our most successful signings in the modern era, you'll find that the vast majority are deals done early.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

8 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Agreed.

"playing the long game" translates roughly into "leaving it late", which is how panic signings happen.

And when looking back at our most successful signings in the modern era, you'll find that the vast majority are deals done early.

I wonder if that means if Kane, Haaland, and Grealish arrive later in the window at Man City then they’re more likely to flop?

[hogesar 9,618]

14 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

I wonder if that means if Kane, Haaland, and Grealish arrive later in the window at Man City then they’re more likely to flop?

The reality is, sometimes you have to wait to land your main targets. It's much easier (as Webber alluded to) to quickly go down the list to your C or D options like last time we were in the prem.

Basically, those moaning would moan regardless, and it's proven. They moaned about the C & D options last Prem campaign, and they're now moaning about us having to play the long game for our A & B options...

[Dean Coneys boots 1,398]

18 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

I wonder if that means if Kane, Haaland, and Grealish arrive later in the window at Man City then they’re more likely to flop?

If you have the resources to buy whoever you want, then clearly not. Those teams aren’t ever pushed into panic buys like poorer clubs 

[chicken 2,604]

17 hours ago, birchfest said:

Urm what? That’s not what happened at all, we made one bid at what we felt was his value back in May, they rejected it and we appeared not interested to offer any more. Now to say we couldn't afford the extra that Brentford then eventually put up, 3 months after our only bid, is a tad naive, especially when we put 10 million on the table then and have since gone on to spend 3 million on LML and are still in for Billing which is going to be somewhere around the 10 mark.

 

It’s simple, we think he’s worth 10 million but not a penny more. We moved on. Why should we bend over and let clubs take us for a ride just because we have the money? To be honest I think it’s Brentford who have taken the slightly more reckless gamble here.

Not only this, but lets see who else Brentford sign come the end of the window.

Right now, they have signed two players of note, one they signed from their "sister club", in other words, another club that their owner owns, and the other is Ajer. Both are 23/24. The rest are all youngsters. 18/19yr olds presumably for their U21's.

If you'd ask me right now who is better off - I would say we are on paper. Even with losing Buendia, as they never had him to start with.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

4 minutes ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

If you have the resources to buy whoever you want, then clearly not. Those teams aren’t ever pushed into panic buys like poorer clubs 

What a load of boll0x. Our respective top targets and getting them over the line are just as relative as theirs, you don’t half talk some shOite in your quest to run our club down at any given opportunity.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

4 hours ago, Badger said:

 

Its quite simple. We didn;t test the market. We didn't do what Brighton have done with White and name a stupidly high price and wait for increasingly desperate clubs to come and buy him. If Grealish goes to Man City do you think Villa would have paid more of less for Buendia? If Maddison moved to Arsenal for £70m where does that set the benchmark for a player like Buendia. i know you will say it would take Arsenal out of the market but is Maddison worth twoice what Emi is?

The point is we sold him as quickly as we could because we needed the cash for our transfers as we needed the cash as we don't have any cashflow until the tv money payments start coming in. In so doing, we passed up the opportunity to get a bidding war going for him.

And before we get the "well he'd made it clear he wanted to go so we had no choice" thats nonsense. I was disturbed to ear Webber say the other day that "his representatives made it clear he was moving on" or words to that effect. His representatives should have been told he can go when someone stumped up a higher fee than we ultimately got. 

 

[hogesar 9,618]

40 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Its quite simple. We didn;t test the market. We didn't do what Brighton have done with White and name a stupidly high price and wait for increasingly desperate clubs to come and buy him. If Grealish goes to Man City do you think Villa would have paid more of less for Buendia? If Maddison moved to Arsenal for £70m where does that set the benchmark for a player like Buendia. i know you will say it would take Arsenal out of the market but is Maddison worth twoice what Emi is?

The point is we sold him as quickly as we could because we needed the cash for our transfers as we needed the cash as we don't have any cashflow until the tv money payments start coming in. In so doing, we passed up the opportunity to get a bidding war going for him.

And before we get the "well he'd made it clear he wanted to go so we had no choice" thats nonsense. I was disturbed to ear Webber say the other day that "his representatives made it clear he was moving on" or words to that effect. His representatives should have been told he can go when someone stumped up a higher fee than we ultimately got. 

 

Well, we didn't sell him as quickly as we could, or he'd have likely gone a year ago. Or when Arsenal first came sniffing, or Athletico. You seem to think Villa just randomly turned up out of thin air one day and went "this is our offer" and within 10 minutes the deal was done. That is incredibly naive.