Alex Scott - £25m to Bournemouth- Confirmed

[Charlie BCFC]

3 hours ago, Negan said:

Such a risk for him going there. Genuinely think it would be an awful move. It’s incredibly hard for any player to stand out in a Bournemouth team. They will more than likely go down so he’s back at championship level after what will be a rough season in the prem so doubt he’ll get a move away to stay at the top. Genuinely think it’s better he stays here for another 12 months and see what happens after that. Bournemouth, Luton and Sheffield United are all clubs he needs to avoid. No good making such an important move in his career to any of them, hold out for that next level of team. If he truly believes in himself he’ll get a better move, going to Bournemouth doesn’t progress his career at all. Just gets a rotational spot in a team that’s finishing in the bottom 5. 

If they were under O’Neil I’d tend to agree but it looks like this manager is an upgrade looking at what he’s achieved already. They have a lot of money to spend aswell, personally I see them staying up 

[Mr Popodopolous]

15 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

If they were under O’Neil I’d tend to agree but it looks like this manager is an upgrade looking at what he’s achieved already. They have a lot of money to spend aswell, personally I see them staying up 

Otoh the lack of experience of the specific challenge of the PL could catch him and then out.

I'd say they have grounds for cautious optimism but it could easily unravel too.

[stortfordred]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Football can be mercenary.  

I know you are only making a point but that’s one of the most ‘No shit, Sherlock’ statements. 
This whole ‘Let’s pretend we’re football managers’ stuff really gets me when it’s to do with selling players, particularly when they are our best ones. 
The whole thing is a food chain that cements Man City at the top and everyone in a nice little rank order beneath them. We sell to X who are higher than us. They sell to Y who are higher than them and then they sell to Man City who win the treble. Simples. 
the only thing that upsets the gravy train is a bigger Sheikh or oligarch coming along. Or…… a few youngsters kicking on at the same time alongside clever recruitment. So basically if we’re going to do anything then we don’t sell him or Vyner or Tanner or Bell. 
However because football is mercenary and because we’re a selling club, we will stay where we are in the food chain. 
 

At least we get some Saturday 3pm kick-offs 

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 minutes ago, stortfordred said:

I know you are only making a point but that’s one of the most ‘No shit, Sherlock’ statements. 
This whole ‘Let’s pretend we’re football managers’ stuff really gets me when it’s to do with selling players, particularly when they are our best ones. 
The whole thing is a food chain that cements Man City at the top and everyone in a nice little rank order beneath them. We sell to X who are higher than us. They sell to Y who are higher than them and then they sell to Man City who win the treble. Simples. 
the only thing that upsets the gravy train is a bigger Sheikh or oligarch coming along. Or…… a few youngsters kicking on at the same time alongside clever recruitment. So basically if we’re going to do anything then we don’t sell him or Vyner or Tanner or Bell. 
However because football is mercenary and because we’re a selling club, we will stay where we are in the food chain. 
 

At least we get some Saturday 3pm kick-offs 

I'm hoping Scott would be the last big sale in a while. Even that isn't a given of course.

PS you forgot Conway. Who could conceivably if fit consistently, hit 15-20 goals this season.

Edited July 11, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'm hoping Scott would be the last big sale in a while. Even that isn't a given of course.

PS you forgot Conway. Who could conceivably if fit consistently, hit 15-20 goals this season.

He won't be the last big sale, every player has a price,

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

He won't be the last big sale, every player has a price,

I get that bit at the same time we have done hard yards and can be a bit more discerning.

[Wanderingred]

IBournemouth  

I want to see our own Alex play for a genuine big club.

[bpexile]

36 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

He won't be the last big sale, every player has a price,

Agreed & the way our academy is turning out players it could well be on a regular basis 

[Lrrr]

20 minutes ago, Wanderingred said:

IBournemouth Bristol City  

I want to see our own Alex Jason play for a genuine big club.

[Wanderingred]

2 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

What’s wrong with wanting our home grown players to succeed at one of the country’s biggest clubs?

[Lrrr]

Just now, Wanderingred said:

What’s wrong with wanting our home grown players to succeed at one of the country’s biggest clubs?

Nothing but same way there's people on here saying Derby fans are crying about the fact Knight came here rather than a 'big' club

[Wanderingred]

Just now, Lrrr said:

Nothing

Good, so we’re done here.

[Dolman_Stand]

5 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Of course the player will have a big say and I'd imagine it to be a very fluid situation.

As Alex is quite mature, he would absolutely understand why we'd accept a higher offer from a smaller club. Our CEO has often spoken about how we have to make every pound count so if Bournemouth offered more than Spurs then we're understandably going to accept that. 

The only way Bournemouth get him over West Ham and Spurs ie because of game time and more money for us. Otherwise they can't compete with those two.

It's not a blind auction though, through agents and representatives any buying club will know what "our number" comprising add-ons, payment structure etc. If they decide they are happy to meet it then Scott will be allowed to leave

[W-S-M Seagull]

19 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

It's not a blind auction though, through agents and representatives any buying club will know what "our number" comprising add-ons, payment structure etc. If they decide they are happy to meet it then Scott will be allowed to leave

Alex Scott hasn't got a minimum release clause in his contract. 

For example, Spurs could come in with a 25 million bid and we can say to Bournemouth or West Ham or whoever that Spurs have bid 25 million and if they'd like to make a higher offer to secure the player then they are free to do that. 

Transfer negotiations are incredibly complicated. Bids are most likely just verbal until all is agreed. Spurs could say 25 million with x amount up front and the rest over 3 years. Bournemouth may say X amount over 4 years but then have different add ons. Who knows.

It's simply not the case that we will accept whoever puts 25 million on the table 1st. 

All this is likely happening right now. 

What I do know is we'll be speaking to all clubs at the same time trying to get the most for us on favourable terms. 

[Davefevs]

29 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Transfer negotiations are incredibly complicated. Bids are most likely just verbal until all is agreed. Spurs could say 25 million with x amount up front and the rest over 3 years. Bournemouth may say X amount over 4 years but then have different add ons. Who knows.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting Alex has a release clause, but it is pretty commonplace that when a player has this sort of multi-club interest, that club, player and agent discuss what kind of amount it would take to let the player go, should he even want to leave.  The player might not agree, but that then enters different scenarios.  City will also know preferred destination if he has one

But ultimately if we agree that club x has hit the “required numbers” (in whatever way) and so has club y, then we were are very unlikely to try to get more from x or y.  It then becomes Alex’s choice.

Just look at what John Pelling did in summer 2015.  Hull told him to eff off.  Brentford touted the player to Burnley.  You lose deals by effing club’s about.

We have been very open and clear re Alex, it’s £25m at least.  If someone wants to come in straightaway with £30m (to cut down the number of clubs they’re in competition with, that’s very different.  But the chances are most clubs are gonna try beneath £25m for starters.

39 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

What I do know is we'll be speaking to all clubs at the same time trying to get the most for us on favourable terms. 

Yes, but that’s because nobody has offered (formally or informally) £25m or whatever the asking price / terms are.  Not because we are trying to turn it into an auction.

[Monkeh]

7 hours ago, bpexile said:

Agreed & the way our academy is turning out players it could well be on a regular basis 

Hopefully, but just because we've produced some.good players in recent years doesn't mean we get complacent,

We should be (and I wager we are) continuing to improve it and try and reach category one

[GrahamC]

Spurs aren’t in for him, he won’t go there.

[BCFCAL]

Does it really matter if he goes to Bournemouth or Real Madrid for us? If we get our asking price, he's no longer our player. It's a step up for him, playing in a higher league, and if he goes, in a couple of years he'll be another Tammy Abraham - hoping he does well, and glad if he gets an England call up, but we'll still be going to Ashton Gate rather than wherever he ends up.

[Monkeh]

48 minutes ago, BCFCAL said:

Does it really matter if he goes to Bournemouth or Real Madrid for us? If we get our asking price, he's no longer our player. It's a step up for him, playing in a higher league, and if he goes, in a couple of years he'll be another Tammy Abraham - hoping he does well, and glad if he gets an England call up, but we'll still be going to Ashton Gate rather than wherever he ends up.

No it doesn't, people are being snobbish,

Just like we are higher in the food chain then Derby at the moment, Bournemouth are higher then us and have been for a long time now,

People need to accept this, it won't always be the case but it is for now, and will be until we have or sustain ourselves in the prem

[the1stknowle]

29 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

No it doesn't, people are being snobbish,

Just like we are higher in the food chain then Derby at the moment, Bournemouth are higher then us and have been for a long time now,

People need to accept this, it won't always be the case but it is for now, and will be until we have or sustain ourselves in the prem

Much, much better for us if he goes to a stepping stone club rather than straight to, say, Spurs. Brighton or Brentford would be dream ticket you'd think to max out likely future transfer value (if he goes on to fulfil potential). Spurs currently seem intent on letting their most valuable asset leave for free rather than selling him for a 'reduced' price. 

Issue with Bournemouth is likelihood of staying in prem which would obviously change his value. But maybe this new manager is the nuts like people seem to think and they will do well. In which case, good place for both Alex and Antoine from both our point of view and theirs (assuming we have decent sell ons in deals which is surely a given).

[Redstart]

Perhaps we should include a buy back clause so if we pass them on our way up, we can use the promotion money to take him back off em

[Davefevs]

53 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

No it doesn't, people are being snobbish,

Just like we are higher in the food chain then Derby at the moment, Bournemouth are higher then us and have been for a long time now,

People need to accept this, it won't always be the case but it is for now, and will be until we have or sustain ourselves in the prem

Agree….it still hurts though!

[Monkeh]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree….it still hurts though!

Oh god yea, I mean how are Brentford in Europe

[Scrumpty]

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree….it still hurts though!

Indeed it does, but I console myself with the fact that our biggest rivals are way below us and have entertained us royally over the past 23 years!

[BCFCAL]

48 minutes ago, the1stknowle said:

Much, much better for us if he goes to a stepping stone club rather than straight to, say, Spurs. Brighton or Brentford would be dream ticket you'd think to max out likely future transfer value (if he goes on to fulfil potential). Spurs currently seem intent on letting their most valuable asset leave for free rather than selling him for a 'reduced' price. 

Issue with Bournemouth is likelihood of staying in prem which would obviously change his value. But maybe this new manager is the nuts like people seem to think and they will do well. In which case, good place for both Alex and Antoine from both our point of view and theirs (assuming we have decent sell ons in deals which is surely a given).

In my opinion, people get too obsessed with sell on clauses. Also, top players get transferred around top teams all the time, he could go to Spurs and hit the ground running, and then go for £100m to a top 5 in the world side. It's a lottery and I don't think you can pick a club based on what trajectory will happen to him. 

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree….it still hurts though!

Life of being a Bristol City fan!

[Super]

2 hours ago, BCFCAL said:

Does it really matter if he goes to Bournemouth or Real Madrid for us? If we get our asking price, he's no longer our player. It's a step up for him, playing in a higher league, and if he goes, in a couple of years he'll be another Tammy Abraham - hoping he does well, and glad if he gets an England call up, but we'll still be going to Ashton Gate rather than wherever he ends up.

Completely right. He can go to Saudi as long as they pay us what he's worth.

[cotswoldred2]

12 minutes ago, Scrumpty said:

Indeed it does, but I console myself with the fact that our biggest rivals are way below us and have entertained us royally over the past 23 years!

And this is part of the problem with our support...fixated by them rather than our own.

[BS3City]

50 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

No it doesn't, people are being snobbish,

Just like we are higher in the food chain then Derby at the moment, Bournemouth are higher then us and have been for a long time now,

People need to accept this, it won't always be the case but it is for now, and will be until we have or sustain ourselves in the prem

Receiving an acceptable bid from anyone makes no difference to me, if he's going then money is money - thank you very much.

I agree with the food chain view, however my dislike for Bournemouth is nothing to do with snobbery. It's the perception of "plucky little fighters having done soooo well against all the odds with such minimal resources, now dining at the captain's table". Bullshit! It was built with money from dubious sources.

Would I take the same? Of course! So maybe it's jealousy.

But it's certainly not snobbery...

[Port Said Red]

2 hours ago, Monkeh said:

No it doesn't, people are being snobbish,

Just like we are higher in the food chain then Derby at the moment, Bournemouth are higher then us and have been for a long time now,

People need to accept this, it won't always be the case but it is for now, and will be until we have or sustain ourselves in the prem

It's not so much that, it's the arrogance and short memories of their supporters. They seem to have forgotten playing at Molinuex with one stand in the 4th division or coming to Ashton Gate on a Saturday knowing that the gates were going to be locked at Dean Court on the following Monday. 

I haven't though, so it would be nice if they had a more of a wow! attitude to some of their signings, rather than suggesting it's inevitable because of who they are.

[Riaz]

Bournemouth would be good for alex scott.

He's likely to play alot more.

And for us, he'll probably thrive there and be snapped up for mega money by a bigger club and we'll get a sell on.

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

1 hour ago, the1stknowle said:

Much, much better for us if he goes to a stepping stone club rather than straight to, say, Spurs. Brighton or Brentford would be dream ticket you'd think to max out likely future transfer value (if he goes on to fulfil potential). Spurs currently seem intent on letting their most valuable asset leave for free rather than selling him for a 'reduced' price. 

Issue with Bournemouth is likelihood of staying in prem which would obviously change his value. But maybe this new manager is the nuts like people seem to think and they will do well. In which case, good place for both Alex and Antoine from both our point of view and theirs (assuming we have decent sell ons in deals which is surely a given).

Stepping stone clubs, haven't we tried that. Wasn't Bournemouth a stepping stone for Kelly, Brighton for Webster and Burnley for Brownhill? How's that worked out so far? I want him to stay but if he goes I'll take the highest bidder please from our end (but hope he goes to a club that would benefit his development). 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

Stepping stone clubs, haven't we tried that. Wasn't Bournemouth a stepping stone for Kelly, Brighton for Webster and Burnley for Brownhill? How's that worked out so far? I want him to stay but if he goes I'll take the highest bidder please from our end (but hope he goes to a club that would benefit his development). 

I guess this is where the “sell-on” is seen as so important to fans when a player is sold, but the reality is it’s rarely achieved, or at least rarely becomes significant.  My view is get as much as you can up-front.

For every Bolassie (boy was that an unexpected windfall) there are the names you mention above.  In fairness I think the fees we got for Kelly and Webster were great, Brownhill dictated by contract terms.

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

Stepping stone clubs, haven't we tried that. Wasn't Bournemouth a stepping stone for Kelly, Brighton for Webster and Burnley for Brownhill? How's that worked out so far? I want him to stay but if he goes I'll take the highest bidder please from our end (but hope he goes to a club that would benefit his development). 

Just that these clubs don't have a great incentive to sell due to a combination of PL cash, Parachute Payments and trading of others.

Had Burnley stayed down in 2022-23 or Bournemouth in 2021-22 or Brighton dropped in Potter's first or second season..sale at profit quite likely IMO in some of all or the cases and sell on to us.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

5 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Bournemouth would be good for alex scott.

He's likely to play alot more.

And for us, he'll probably thrive there and be snapped up for mega money by a bigger club and we'll get a sell on.

I love this vain hope about sell ons. Ofcourse you have to put such a clause into a sale but you can't factor in benefitting from them. Despite all the talk we've seen nothing from Kelly, Webster or Brownhill. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

I love this vain hope about sell ons. Ofcourse you have to put such a clause into a sale but you can't factor in benefitting from them. Despite all the talk we've seen nothing from Kelly, Webster or Brownhill. 

Birmingham could benefit from 2 this summer. Bellingham already they have and there was talk of Che Adams leaving Southampton earlier this summer. Stoke did with Collins last year, Norwich will with Maddison this season. West Brom with Morgan Rogers albeit won't be much.

Preston did from our sale of Brownhill too iirc.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Gillies Downs Leeds]

Don't know if it has been mentioned but Bournemouth have signed a midfielder for 12million and immediately loaned him out to a french club for the season. Never thought I would see the day when they could afford to do that. Almost Chelseaesque.

[Riaz]

5 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

I love this vain hope about sell ons. Ofcourse you have to put such a clause into a sale but you can't factor in benefitting from them. Despite all the talk we've seen nothing from Kelly, Webster or Brownhill. 

None of those players have left their clubs - think your jumping the gun a bit.

But the main thing is, we get our asking price. If we get that then why do we care?

[Mr Popodopolous]

9 minutes ago, Riaz said:

None of those players have left their clubs - think your jumping the gun a bit.

But the main thing is, we get our asking price. If we get that then why do we care?

I knew, just had a gut feeling that we wouldn't benefit from any of those 3 last sesson.

Kompany declared Brownhill to be unsellable or words to that effect others were but not Brownhill. Stoke benefited from Collins to Wolves e.g.

The cost of selling Kelly and missing promotion was clearly seen as less of a risk by Bournemouth. They went up and stayed up so he won't be off.

Parachute Payments also in both cases.

Webster has a contract until 2026 and Brighton are increasingly good negotiatiors, PL and European money, major sales..they'll only sell who they want to on their terms barring a buyout clause. Webster will be there for a while IMO.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Riaz]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I knew, just had a gut feeling that we wouldn't benefit from any of those 3 last sesson.

Kompany declared Brownhill to be unsellable or words to that effect others were but not Brownhill. Stoke benefited from Collins to Wolves e.g.

The cost of selling Kelly and missing promotion was clearly seen as less of a risk by Bournemouth. They went up and stayed up so he won't be off.

Parachute Payments also in both cases.

Webster has a contract until 2026 and Brighton are increasingly good negotiatiors, PL and European money, major sales..they'll only sell who they want to on their terms barring a buyout clause. Webster will be there for a while IMO.

Personally, i think all three could get big moves in the future.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Riaz

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

8 minutes ago, Riaz said:

None of those players have left their clubs - think your jumping the gun a bit.

But the main thing is, we get our asking price. If we get that then why do we care?

My point is that while sell on clauses are a prudent necessity you can't factor into calculations that you are going to benefit from them. There are too many variable around club or player future fortunes. I'm with Davefevs and others, get what you want upfront and enjoy the fringe benefits if they ever materialise. 

[ScottishRed]

16 minutes ago, Gillies Downs Leeds said:

Don't know if it has been mentioned but Bournemouth have signed a midfielder for 12million and immediately loaned him out to a french club for the season. Never thought I would see the day when they could afford to do that. Almost Chelseaesque.

Same owner. Probably plays a big part in that.

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Personally, i think all three could get big moves in the future.

Could but Kelly and Brownhill are entering the final year of their contract. Percentage of profit is the benchmark for us benefiting from a sell-on clause.

Webster, Brighton again I don't see selling unless they really want to, or maybe he'll leave on a free in 2026 who knows. The football Gods don't seem to throw many lucky breaks our way.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Unan]

20 hours ago, bcfc01 said:

Not really.

If Spurs for example (or a number of EPL clubs) come in at the same price, where's he gonna go ?

 

If Spurs came in for the same money, he’d obviously go to Spurs, so Bournemouth could then offer 27, 28, 30m, hence starting a bidding war.

[Unan]

20 hours ago, RedRaw said:

If £25 million is met, the only bidding war will be who will pay him the highest wages

[mozo]

21 hours ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

It's all if and ands though isn't it. If we sell him for £25M it's a decent price. If he stays and drives us towards a win in the play off final what's that worth, £100M.

How about we sell him for £25M.

Then win the league without him for the £100M.

Then PSG buy him next season for £80M and we have a 20% sell on clause.

Quids in.

[Riaz]

20 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

My point is that while sell on clauses are a prudent necessity you can't factor into calculations that you are going to benefit from them. There are too many variable around club or player future fortunes. I'm with Davefevs and others, get what you want upfront and enjoy the fringe benefits if they ever materialise. 

Absolutely.

My point earlier, was if we get the fee we want - why do we care which club he goes to and if anything, we are more likely to get a sell on, with a smaller club

[Monkeh]

54 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

If Spurs came in for the same money, he’d obviously go to Spurs, so Bournemouth could then offer 27, 28, 30m, hence starting a bidding war.

That's not how a bidding war works, if any club came in with 25 million we'd accept it, why then would another club come in with more money?

In order for a bidding war to start we'd have to reject the offer of 25 million, and as we've set that as his price we wouldn't reject that bid,

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

12 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t think anyone is suggesting Alex has a release clause, but it is pretty commonplace that when a player has this sort of multi-club interest, that club, player and agent discuss what kind of amount it would take to let the player go, should he even want to leave.  The player might not agree, but that then enters different scenarios.  City will also know preferred destination if he has one

But ultimately if we agree that club x has hit the “required numbers” (in whatever way) and so has club y, then we were are very unlikely to try to get more from x or y.  It then becomes Alex’s choice.

Just look at what John Pelling did in summer 2015.  Hull told him to eff off.  Brentford touted the player to Burnley.  You lose deals by effing club’s about.

We have been very open and clear re Alex, it’s £25m at least.  If someone wants to come in straightaway with £30m (to cut down the number of clubs they’re in competition with, that’s very different.  But the chances are most clubs are gonna try beneath £25m for starters.

Yes, but that’s because nobody has offered (formally or informally) £25m or whatever the asking price / terms are.  Not because we are trying to turn it into an auction.

The point I'm making Dave is that people seem to think that as soon as we get a 25 million bid, we'll accept it, almost as if that 25 million we put on his head is a release clause. People seem to think that the first club to offer 25 million will get him. 

You know that transfer fees can be incredibly complicated and that two 25 million pound bids probably wouldn't look the same.

The reality is a club will bid 25 million and we'll say "thanks, we'll get back to you after we've discussed it as a club" we'll then maybe leak it to the press that such and such has bid 25 million or get our agents or intermediaries to spread the word to other interested clubs to see if we can possibly get more from another club. 

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

8 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not how a bidding war works, if any club came in with 25 million we'd accept it, why then would another club come in with more money?

In order for a bidding war to start we'd have to reject the offer of 25 million, and as we've set that as his price we wouldn't reject that bid,

 

As I've just said. The 25 million isn't a release clause. It's ridiculous to suggest that we'd immediately accept a 25 million bid from the 1st club to offer it. That's not how it works. 

25 million is what we want, but it's by no means a set in stone figure. 

There is no formal process to making bids for players. You don't have to submit your bid to the EFL or anything. A bid isn't legally binding. A bid in most cases is just a telephone call which says something like "we'd like to offer you 25 million for Alex Scott and these are the terms of the transfer" it may then be put in an email about how they propose the deal is structured. 

[Son of Fred]

6 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not how a bidding war works, if any club came in with 25 million we'd accept it, why then would another club come in with more money?

In order for a bidding war to start we'd have to reject the offer of 25 million, and as we've set that as his price we wouldn't reject that bid,

 

And if the 25 million was offered & the player does not wish to sign for that club????........

Alex is a bright young man - he won't be leaving us on any consideration other than to a destination of his choice - 

 

[ScottishRed]

10 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not how a bidding war works, if any club came in with 25 million we'd accept it, why then would another club come in with more money?

In order for a bidding war to start we'd have to reject the offer of 25 million, and as we've set that as his price we wouldn't reject that bid,

 

Don’t think that is true. If a club offers £25m I am sure we would except it, but that does not make it nessecarily a binding contract.

There would be nothing to stop another club offering £26m possibly after missing out on another target.

In all of this nothing is set in stone until Alex signs a contract.

Witness Joe Bryan agreeing to go to Villa then legging it down the M1 when Fulham made, I assume, a more attractive offer. The better offer does not need to be higher wages.

[Unan]

17 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

That's not how a bidding war works, if any club came in with 25 million we'd accept it, why then would another club come in with more money?

In order for a bidding war to start we'd have to reject the offer of 25 million, and as we've set that as his price we wouldn't reject that bid,

 

Lansdown added: "We've quoted £25m in the past, I really don't know where it goes. It's supply and demand, isn't it? If there are lots of clubs interested in him, then the value goes up. source

We haven't set 25m as our price, so we could easily reject 25 million if we know there are concrete bids in the pipeline from multiple clubs.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Marcus Aurelius

[Davefevs]

26 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

The point I'm making Dave is that people seem to think that as soon as we get a 25 million bid, we'll accept it, almost as if that 25 million we put on his head is a release clause. People seem to think that the first club to offer 25 million will get him. 

You know that transfer fees can be incredibly complicated and that two 25 million pound bids probably wouldn't look the same.

The reality is a club will bid 25 million and we'll say "thanks, we'll get back to you after we've discussed it as a club" we'll then maybe leak it to the press that such and such has bid 25 million or get our agents or intermediaries to spread the word to other interested clubs to see if we can possibly get more from another club. 

 

That….….I agree with.  Don’t have to show our hand straight away.

[Davefevs]

19 minutes ago, ScottishRed said:

Don’t think that is true. If a club offers £25m I am sure we would except it, but that does not make it nessecarily a binding contract.

There would be nothing to stop another club offering £26m possibly after missing out on another target.

In all of this nothing is set in stone until Alex signs a contract.

Witness Joe Bryan agreeing to go to Villa then legging it down the M1 when Fulham made, I assume, a more attractive offer. The better offer does not need to be higher wages.

Fulham didn’t offer City more money than Villa, Villa were Championship, Fulham Premier League, don’t forget.  I very much suspect the winner was Bryan / Fulham, not City, ie the attractive offer was for Bryan only!

19 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Lansdown added: "We've quoted £25m in the past, I really don't know where it goes. It's supply and demand, isn't it? If there are lots of clubs interested in him, then the value goes up. source

We haven't set 25m as our price, so we could easily reject 25 million if we know there are concrete bids in the pipeline from multiple clubs.

We could indeed….but once we accept an offer, it’s very unlikely we’d renege on that - that is the point.

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

I’m not sure “concrete” and “bids in the pipeline” really go together!

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Fulham didn’t offer City more money than Villa, Villa were Championship, Fulham Premier League, don’t forget.  I very much suspect the winner was Bryan / Fulham, not City, ie the attractive offer was for Bryan only!

We could indeed….but once we accept an offer, it’s very unlikely we’d renege on that - that is the point.

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

I’m not sure “concrete” and “bids in the pipeline” really go together!

With quite a few clubs interested, would we name a price? Or would it be a case of "what are you offering us?"

[Mr Popodopolous]

39 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Lansdown added: "We've quoted £25m in the past, I really don't know where it goes. It's supply and demand, isn't it? If there are lots of clubs interested in him, then the value goes up. source

We haven't set 25m as our price, so we could easily reject 25 million if we know there are concrete bids in the pipeline from multiple clubs.

Although on the flipside if nobody is willing to meet it then we have a decision to make. The jury is still out as to whether anyone will meet the £25m price tag but things can change in an instant.

If Bournemouth do then the dial moves significantly again although it seems to be giving clubs pause.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

then we have a decision to make

….Alex stays.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Davefevs

[chinapig]

4 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

With quite a few clubs interested, would we name a price? Or would it be a case of "what are you offering us?"

Unfortunately £25m is already in the public domain. But yes in a competitive negotiation it can be a good tactic to invite an offer. They might just offer more than you expected!

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

….Alex stays.

Well yes, basically yes but variables such as whether we may have a discontented player on our hands- if West Ham bid £22m as one report suggested and we flat out reject "£25m baseline and not a penny less" could Scott becoming disgruntled.

Then how might his value decrease going into the last 12 months. Still January of course but that window can be sketchy unless post a Winter World Cup (Stoke wouldn't have got £15m for Souttar IMO in a typical January window).

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Unan]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Fulham didn’t offer City more money than Villa, Villa were Championship, Fulham Premier League, don’t forget.  I very much suspect the winner was Bryan / Fulham, not City, ie the attractive offer was for Bryan only!

We could indeed….but once we accept an offer, it’s very unlikely we’d renege on that - that is the point.

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

I’m not sure “concrete” and “bids in the pipeline” really go together!

Concrete + bids in the pipeline /=/ we're confident that x team will put a bid in for y price. I'm no expert in transfer negotiations but for Mr Lansdown to mention "supply and demand" it seems, to me at least, to suggest that clubs will compete with each other, and offer more money. With some reconciliation, I do agree that it won't be a 'bidding war' or an 'auction', as in, several clubs won't keep trying to outbid each other, with City accepting bids, but I believe that we will reject offers, potentially even over 25m, if we believe we can get more elsewhere.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Unfortunately £25m is already in the public domain. But yes in a competitive negotiation it can be a good tactic to invite an offer. They might just offer more than you expected!

Christian Dailly.  Derby manager told don’t accept less than £2.5m.  Blackburn came in with £5.35m!!!

[Unan]

9 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Although on the flipside if nobody is willing to meet it then we have a decision to make. The jury is still out as to whether anyone will meet the £25m price tag but things can change in an instant.

If Bournemouth do then the dial moves significantly again although it seems to be giving clubs pause.

Agreed, the Lansdown comment I quoted was to more so show that there isn't an exact price set, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go for under £25m, although I'd hope not.

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Well yes, basically yes but variables such as whether we may have a discontented player on our hands- if West Ham bid £22m as one report suggested and we flat out reject "£25m baseline and not a penny less" could Scott becoming disgruntled.

Then how might his value decrease going into the last 12 months. Still January of course but that window can be sketchy unless post a Winter World Cup (Stoke wouldn't have got £15m for Souttar IMO in a typical January window).

My go to is that Sporting are paying circa 20 million for Gyokeres and he has 11 months left on his deal. 

Whilst Gyokeres is good, I don't ever see him eventually playing at a mid table premier league club, let alone a top 4 side. Alex Scott will. 

Also, we have the insurance that we will get compensation for Alex upon the expiry of his contract.

 

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

As I've just said. The 25 million isn't a release clause. It's ridiculous to suggest that we'd immediately accept a 25 million bid from the 1st club to offer it. That's not how it works. 

25 million is what we want, but it's by no means a set in stone figure. 

There is no formal process to making bids for players. You don't have to submit your bid to the EFL or anything. A bid isn't legally binding. A bid in most cases is just a telephone call which says something like "we'd like to offer you 25 million for Alex Scott and these are the terms of the transfer" it may then be put in an email about how they propose the deal is structured. 

No its not but its also the price we've said publicly we'd accept and would be our record sale, 

I can safely say if anyone bit 25 million, Bristol city would accept, I'd even put money on it

[chinapig]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Christian Dailly.  Derby manager told don’t accept less than £2.5m.  Blackburn came in with £5.35m!!!

Was it Seth Johnson who Risdale told that Leeds wouldn't pay a penny more than £35k a week, which was miles more than his agent was going to ask for?

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, Son of Fred said:

And if the 25 million was offered & the player does not wish to sign for that club????........

Alex is a bright young man - he won't be leaving us on any consideration other than to a destination of his choice - 

 

Then he turns down the contract, that wouldn't mean another club would bid more money, that's Peter Ridsdale style of thinking and any sane ceo would not do it, 

[Unan]

28 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 

So let’s change the scenario to be aligned to what you’re suggesting.  Spurs are in talks with us, we know Bournemouth are interested too (pipeline).  At some point in those individual discussions (it is not an auction house where the other clubs know who’s bidding and what they’re bidding), City are gonna name their price and terms.  Spurs meet the price and terms.  We aren’t going to go back to Bournemouth and increase the price and terms for them to see if they nibble, we’ve already told them the terms.  They will see very quickly where this is going.  They ain’t gonna offer more, because they know we will do the same to Tottenham and on it goes…or in fact it won’t go on and on…because both clubs will refuse to go higher than the original agreed fee and terms or pull out and our club’s reputation will be in tatters.

 

Do you not think that this is a possibility then? Again, I have no formal experience, but for example let’s say Tottenham are willing to spend up to 28m on Scott, and Bournemouth 26m, we’ve told them both to secure this player you must pay 30m, we’re open to offers, they both come in with offers of 20m, we inform both clubs that another club has bid the same amount and to secure the transfer you must pay more, each club is willing to pay more as they already have their maximum amount set and they’re both well under it, they then make additional bids etc etc. City would be at risk of a club potentially pulling out, but that is always the case, once one team has hit their limit then they simply won’t bid, or will say this is our final offer, and the other team may, or may not, offer more. We would, probably, get a larger sum than trying to call the bluff of an individual team. 
 

OR, maybe this is fanciful and not how the real word works.

Edited July 12, 2023 by Marcus Aurelius

[Mr Popodopolous]

13 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Agreed, the Lansdown comment I quoted was to more so show that there isn't an exact price set, I wouldn't be surprised to see him go for under £25m, although I'd hope not.

Fingers crossed that we either get our price or above or he stays and is happy to do so.

11 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

My go to is that Sporting are paying circa 20 million for Gyokeres and he has 11 months left on his deal. 

Whilst Gyokeres is good, I don't ever see him eventually playing at a mid table premier league club, let alone a top 4 side. Alex Scott will. 

Also, we have the insurance that we will get compensation for Alex upon the expiry of his contract.

 

That is true although banking on compensation in extremis dunno the formula tbh.

Think you undersell Gykores a bit and there is striker premium too though there is no doubt Scott is ahead of him at respective stages of their career..Scott has the English premium although has this taken a small step back with a recent slight liberalisation of football work permit regulations.

https://www.reuters.com/sports/soccer/new-rules-allow-english-clubs-sign-players-who-do-not-meet-work-permit-2023-06-14/

Edited July 12, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Monkeh]

1 hour ago, ScottishRed said:

Don’t think that is true. If a club offers £25m I am sure we would except it, but that does not make it nessecarily a binding contract.

There would be nothing to stop another club offering £26m possibly after missing out on another target.

In all of this nothing is set in stone until Alex signs a contract.

Witness Joe Bryan agreeing to go to Villa then legging it down the M1 when Fulham made, I assume, a more attractive offer. The better offer does not need to be higher wages.

But why would they? The last doughnut in the shop is a pound, some one offers a pound, do you come in and offer one fifty? No because it makes no sense, it isn't a auction, 

Why can't people grasp basic economics, it's mind bending

[bcfc01]

2 hours ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

If Spurs came in for the same money, he’d obviously go to Spurs, so Bournemouth could then offer 27, 28, 30m, hence starting a bidding war.

I don't think so.

The fee is 25m and everyone knows it.

Lets put it this way, Spurs offer 25m and Bournemouth offer 27m, Scott will join Spurs and there's nothing City can do about it. Spurs have met the asking price and the player wants to go there not Bournemouth.

As long as 25m is met, it will be down to Scott to decide who to join.