Club record fee?

[GrantsMoustache 0]

Pinkun article says that the fee for Snoddy is believed to be a club record.

I believe that Ashton went for £7m rising to £7.25m.

If true the fee could well be more than the £7m quoted, perhaps £7.5m or even the £8m being touted a few days before he left?

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

There''s a lot of evidence that it was £7m rising to £8m with bonuses. Good business, well done.

[# 0]

A record fee for selling................says it all really. [:S]

[morty 0]

[quote user="Wiz"]A record fee for selling................says it all really. [:S][/quote][URL=http://s869.photobucket.com/user/mortymccarthy/media/large-bun-door-knob-3034-51-abu_zps770b306a.jpg.html][IMG]http://i869.photobucket.com/albums/ab257/mortymccarthy/large-bun-door-knob-3034-51-abu_zps770b306a.jpg[/IMG][/URL]

[Move Klose 303]

Well our record signing is bigger than our record selling.

[Tetteys Jig 830]

Oh come on Wiz, it''s football. Man U lost Ronaldo for big money, Spurs lost Bale, Barca lost Yaya Toure. It happens to every club.

I''m far happier that we have £8m and £30 odd k off the wages a week than I would be with Snodgrass with a year left on his deal on the books.

It eases the pressure of selling more important players later down the line as well.

The fear is that with the money talked about in the premiership, all our good players leaving for ridiculous fees. Imagine a situation like this:

Ruddy - £12m

Fer - £15m

Olsson - £8m

Hooper - £8m

Bassong - £5m

Redmond - £10m

Hypothetical I know and about double their true values in a few cases but with us under no pressure etc. some of these could be plausable. If we sold these, we''d have £58m in the coffers and about £150k saved per week in wages.

We''d then have a problem like Southampton but worse. What the heck would we do with all that money? Unfortunately it''s not like Footie manager where we could go to player search and magically all the possible players interested in us have been sorted into value and all the top Ukranian premier league players we bring in adapt well and fire us to glory. I don''t think spending £58m would even nearly guarantee promotion.

[Salopian 1]

It seems that it is £7m, with add ons - sell on, appearances, Hull survival, etc., which would take it towards £8m.

When comparing two amounts of money at (slightly) different points in history, it is not uncommon to allow for inflation between them. (Tommy Lawton the England centre forward in the 1940s and 1950s was rumoured never to have received more then £20 per week, which clearly would be well short of the £200k a week for our present top players, but this is an extreme comparison with a different game now in all respects.) The £7m for Ashton quite a few years back now could well be approaching £8m if uprated for price rises during the interim.

In strict money terms it if we receive the add-ons from Snodgrass, then this would seem to be a club record. This may suggest some desperation on Hull''s part, as my personal opinion is that Ashton in his prime was a much better player.

[Block Y Seat 176 80]

[quote user="GrantsMoustache"]Pinkun article says that the fee for Snoddy is believed to be a club record.

I believe that Ashton went for £7m rising to £7.25m.

If true the fee could well be more than the £7m quoted, perhaps £7.5m or even the £8m being touted a few days before he left?[/quote]

Read the article but what interested me was the two previous offers which were turned down. they seemed to have come from a different club. I wonder who?

H

[TCCANARY 263]

[quote user="haisbrohacker"][quote user="GrantsMoustache"]Pinkun article says that the fee for Snoddy is believed to be a club record. I believe that Ashton went for £7m rising to £7.25m. If true the fee could well be more than the £7m quoted, perhaps £7.5m or even the £8m being touted a few days before he left?[/quote] Read the article but what interested me was the two previous offers which were turned down. they seemed to have come from a different club. I wonder who? H[/quote]

 

1p5wich offered £1.28, when that was turned down they came back with £1.28 and some blue seats (never used).

 

 

[Tetteys Jig 830]

I reckon it was Celtic who tried to get him on the cheap and hoped we''d fear them coming back in January to negotiate his free transfer.

[Gingerpele 0]

[quote user="Wiz"]A record fee for selling................says it all really. [:S][/quote]

It does say it all. Really good business.

And I assume you missed us breaking our record transfer fee last year? A fee higher than this one received for selling. Were you aware of that? Or were you hoping everyone would forget to suit your little Norwich/Anti Delia agenda?

[Dubai Mark 0]

Ashton better than Snoddy......different types of players, but yes Ashton was top class and had he not been injured would I am sure been a regular goalscorer for England. As for Snodgrass, he is clearly a very good player and we have received top dollar for him considering his contract status.......we will miss him but not as much as some think U agree, others seem glad to see him go which I find hard to understand.

[TIL 1010 4,722]

Ashton was different to Snodgrass in so much that upon relegation there was a get out clause triggered by a certain offer and as we know along came West Ham. That I thought was common knowledge at the time but have not heard any mention of such a clause in relation to Snodgrass.

[JC 0]

I think it is great business, I expect Snodgrass said he would leave at the end of his contract unless the club were back in the Prem (which you couldn''t blame a player coming into his prime wanting to play at the top level)

To get £7m+ for a player with 1 year left on his contract is amazing business

[whoareyou? 0]

[quote user="Jimmy Smith"]Oh come on Wiz, it''s football. Man U lost Ronaldo for big money, Spurs lost Bale, Barca lost Yaya Toure. It happens to every club.

I''m far happier that we have £8m and £30 odd k off the wages a week than I would be with Snodgrass with a year left on his deal on the books.

It eases the pressure of selling more important players later down the line as well.

The fear is that with the money talked about in the premiership, all our good players leaving for ridiculous fees. Imagine a situation like this:

Ruddy - £12m

Fer - £15m

Olsson - £8m

Hooper - £8m

Bassong - £5m

Redmond - £10m

Hypothetical I know and about double their true values in a few cases but with us under no pressure etc. some of these could be plausable. If we sold these, we''d have £58m in the coffers and about £150k saved per week in wages.

We''d then have a problem like Southampton but worse. What the heck would we do with all that money? Unfortunately it''s not like Footie manager where we could go to player search and magically all the possible players interested in us have been sorted into value and all the top Ukranian premier league players we bring in adapt well and fire us to glory. I don''t think spending £58m would even nearly guarantee promotion.[/quote]But if we want to replace all those players IF we were to get back in the Premier  league, it would cost us the same money.

[YellowNets1901 0]

Apparently it''s £7.75 rising to £8m, so very close to £8m. I suppose Hull are keen to publicly state the figure at around £7m because they don''t want the obvious criticism to come their way, but it''s basically £8m and a very good deal for us.