BP1960 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 With todays news of an Arab takeover of Manchester City, perhaps it's the right time to renegotiate the Micah Richards sell on clause. I can't see Richards going anywhere in the next few years so perhaps a compromise settlement can be reached, maybe £2 million, what do you think ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
help_shiny Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 (edited) With todays news of an Arab takeover of Manchester City, perhaps it's the right time to renegotiate the Micah Richards sell on clause. I can't see Richards going anywhere in the next few years so perhaps a compromise settlement can be reached, maybe £2 million, what do you think ? It's a tough one isnt it? Stick or twist kind of thing. Although their previous 1M offer was rightly knocked back I think that maybe £2M might be good for both sides. Latics would have to fully investigate matters though - they'll have a much better inside track on his chances of moving on anytime soon than we do. Summat for TTA's to thing about Edited September 1, 2008 by help_shiny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Depends what the valuation of Richards is ? £2M is well short , maybe £3M is more like it. Need to agree without selling out just for the hell of it , why should we let Citeh off lightly ? , a we deperate for the funds ? ......think not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky_Latic Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Micah is only twenty. Who cares if you cant see him leaving in the next few years. It's not like he's only going a few years left in the game. Bags of time and the way football's gone and carrying on with Transfer fee's in the top flight. I'm pretty sure we can afford to hold out for some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 think citys offer last time to buyout the sell on clause was a couple of hundred thou tops!!!!! Considering he is valued now at 20 mill at least, any offer would have to be for 3 mill at least Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
help_shiny Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 but if he stays for a few more years and then just leaves at the end of a contract - once he's over whatever age (23?) then we'll get feck all (I think, I must confess I'm not 100% on all the ins and outs) And as our board have made noises that they'll have to flog players maybe it would be right to cash in. Maybe not. I dont know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Its just been confirmed now, they have successfully taken over the club. City now officially richer than man u. Hillarious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futchers briefs Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Its just been confirmed now, they have successfully taken over the club. City now officially richer than man u. Hillarious Again!?!? Weren't they richer when the Jap(Thai!?!) took over. I can't see them paying us £2/3mill for a player they own now who (I hope not!!) could get a serious injury at any time or a number of injuries and thus lose value. Sure that's not going to happen, but i'm sure as a businessman they'd be reluctant to hand over such a large sum. - Pity though! As Rocky has said, hold on for a while yet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slurms mckenzie Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 think citys offer last time to buyout the sell on clause was a couple of hundred thou tops!!!!! Considering he is valued now at 20 mill at least, any offer would have to be for 3 mill at least I also heard the offer was £200K, rather than 1 mill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Its just been confirmed now, they have successfully taken over the club. City now officially richer than man u. Hillarious I will rephrase that City now have a hell of alot more spending power than man u Apparently this group have bought city from their own money (ie not borrowed) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsLee Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 yeah they have bought the club from there own money, The owner said he wants to be as big as chelsea. anyway back to the subject of richards i think the club should at least make the offer to £3mill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaddy Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 check out the name on the picture,renaming them that would be funnycheck this out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wozz_oafc Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 If City are as rich now as it is being reported then maybe it would be a good idea to cash in on the clause, as is there is no guarantee they would get rid of Richards full stop and we would get nothing. With it being City though i can see it all falling through:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 With todays news of an Arab takeover of Manchester City, perhaps it's the right time to renegotiate the Micah Richards sell on clause. I can't see Richards going anywhere in the next few years so perhaps a compromise settlement can be reached, maybe £2 million, what do you think ? There's no way they'll give us anything like that figure and he may yet stay at City for the whole of his career. I'd sit on it for now as in the future he may end up at Arsenal who I think is the team he supports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 There's no way they'll give us anything like that figure and he may yet stay at City for the whole of his career. I'd sit on it for now as in the future he may end up at Arsenal who I think is the team he supports. Why the hell would City give OAFC several million pounds when they don't have to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Do you reckon city would actually want to cash in on their clause? If these owners are serious then they will see Richards as a player who is indespensible so why give us a million 2 million or whatever? Really with this one we aren't I believe in any position of strength to negotiate with them so It think we may have to leave it. Its very rare that you see a top player run down his contract now clubs are quite savy to this and have them tied down to a new deal or sold off a year before their contarct is due to expire. Anyway best wait to see how this takeover works out as even if it goes through Thaksin will very much be in the frame with city which could be a potential for conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 (edited) Do you reckon city would actually want to cash in on their clause? If these owners are serious then they will see Richards as a player who is indespensible so why give us a million 2 million or whatever? Really with this one we aren't I believe in any position of strength to negotiate with them so It think we may have to leave it. Its very rare that you see a top player run down his contract now clubs are quite savy to this and have them tied down to a new deal or sold off a year before their contarct is due to expire. Anyway best wait to see how this takeover works out as even if it goes through Thaksin will very much be in the frame with city which could be a potential for conflict. It's being reported that Thaksin is out of the picture now-Honorary President or some such relatively powerless figurehead. Edited September 1, 2008 by Corporal_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 It's being reported that Thaksin is out of the picture now-Honorary President or some such relatively powerless figurehead. True but the BBC website has said that Thaksin is keen to retain a stake in the club anyway will see what happens. How many times before have we heard new owners coming making sweeping statements only to not follow up on what they have promised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 True but the BBC website has said that Thaksin is keen to retain a stake in the club anyway will see what happens. How many times before have we heard new owners coming making sweeping statements only to not follow up on what they have promised. Rarely are new owners as serious as these characters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 check out the name on the picture,renaming them that would be funnycheck this out It would be funny if they had invted that, how can a City person sign up to that!!! Maybe it's oine way of ensuring that Berbatov does sign for United, trick him into it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 Why the hell would City give OAFC several million pounds when they don't have to? To save them giving 5 million or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 To save them giving 5 million or so. For one thing, it's pure speculation that Richards will be sold at the kind of price usually touted. For another, as of today City don't have to sell anybody they don't want to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz_Oafc Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 City are going to give Micah £150k a week (or how ever much he wants) FOR LIFE or until he's gash and worthless... so why the hell would they be willing to give us a couple of million quid, when there never going to sell him. And he won’t want to ever move, cos no club will match his wage. Think what Chelski do now, buy players for £30million on a 100k pw deal, and sell em for next to nowt, so clubs can afford the wage without having to pay the transfer fee (exactly what city are going to do, they wont be in the ''we need to sell for max profit'' boat anymore) which means zilch cash for us. I think people need to get real if they think we can just stroll up to city with the'' oh by the way, you owe us 20% of you best player who your never going to sell, but when/if he does leave, it wont be for a transfer fee so, as your loaded... can we have a few million anyway please?'' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 City are going to give Micah £150k a week (or how ever much he wants) FOR LIFE or until he's gash and worthless... so why the hell would they be willing to give us a couple of million quid, when there never going to sell him. And he won’t want to ever move, cos no club will match his wage. Think what Chelski do now, buy players for £30million on a 100k pw deal, and sell em for next to nowt, so clubs can afford the wage without having to pay the transfer fee (exactly what city are going to do, they wont be in the ''we need to sell for max profit'' boat anymore) which means zilch cash for us. I think people need to get real if they think we can just stroll up to city with the'' oh by the way, you owe us 20% of you best player who your never going to sell, but when/if he does leave, it wont be for a transfer fee so, as your loaded... can we have a few million anyway please?'' Precisely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 (edited) Precisely. Becasuse it's about what the player wants also. If he wants to be in a preceptively better team chasing Champions League level with players he likes adn are supposed to be mates, then no amount of money will keep him there. And who says they are going to give him £Xm for life. Just paper talk. Same ones that reckoned Berbatov had already sign for Man U at the weekend. They just guess every option so they can print the page to say it was an exclusive, ignoring the load of bull stories they printed. It's not my opinion whether United are better than City, it is what Richard may percieve. He may not also. We don't know. But you cannot say it is not a viable option. They have offered once, they may again. Even though the alleged new owners have serious dosh, they didn;t get it by throwing it away, everyone knows those with most money are the tightest with it. Edited September 1, 2008 by singe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.