Kroenke/Gazidis/Wenger out!: Page 226 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Kroenke/Gazidis/Wenger out!

Mirth

qs! wrote:
otfgoon wrote:
It's not a derisory bid unless you're a precious nancy that doesn't like how business works. Unfortunately for us, that's exactly what Liverpool are. No one in their right mind would bid an extra 2m than they have to in order to trigger a clause just to be polite, if you don't like the one pound don't insert ridiculous clauses into your employees contracts.

There was no clause. 😆

That was only known later. It needed the PFA's input to make things clear.

Timbob

There is a clause and £40m is the specific figure cited in the clause. Just turns out its totally pointless.

goon

Regardless of what the clause turned out to be, there was a clause and we're well within our rights to test it.

Qwiss

We were within our rights to bid whatever we wanted but that doesn't change the fact we got it wrong when we took Suarez agents word on it.

Mirth

flobaba wrote:
Except, it is.

Biggus wrote:
General Mirth wrote:
Whether the club are serious or not is beside the point, with specific regard to Suarez, £40,000,001 isn't a derisory bid.

I think you'd better look up the meaning of derisory.

Unless you have a childhood fear of odd numbers I don't get the problem. We offered more money than any other English club has for a player apart from Chelsea that time they signed Torres. The bid was not derisory.

evoh

The £1 bit may have irked them but there are 40 million other ones which tell you the offer is pretty much a high level deal, nothing to turn anyone's nose up at.

Tony Montana

otfgoon wrote:
It's not a derisory bid unless you're a precious nancy that doesn't like how business works. Unfortunately for us, that's exactly what Liverpool are. No one in their right mind would bid an extra 2m than they have to in order to trigger a clause just to be polite, if you don't like the one pound don't insert ridiculous clauses into your employees contracts.

What is 2 million even for Arsenal? The one pound extra is obviously offensive. Why be so cheap? And apparently PSG paid a few million over Cavani's clause to purchase him.

Mirth

You're advocating spending £2m so that Liverpool don't feel bad about themselves? On top of what would be one of the most expensive transfers of all time (had the deal actually goes through?) Seriously? And you're point of comparison is PSG?

You're mental.

goon

What is 30 pence to you Tony? Next time you go buy a 50p packet of crisps make sure you offer 80p, wouldn't want to be cheap now would we.

mohan

qs! wrote:
We were within our rights to bid whatever we wanted but that doesn't change the fact we got it wrong when we took Suarez agents word on it.

who else are we going to ask in this case?

Rohit

Tony Montana wrote:
otfgoon wrote:
It's not a derisory bid unless you're a precious nancy that doesn't like how business works. Unfortunately for us, that's exactly what Liverpool are. No one in their right mind would bid an extra 2m than they have to in order to trigger a clause just to be polite, if you don't like the one pound don't insert ridiculous clauses into your employees contracts.

What is 2 million even for Arsenal? The one pound extra is obviously offensive. Why be so cheap? And apparently PSG paid a few million over Cavani's clause to purchase him.

So can you conclusively say that no player's release clause has ever been triggered in such manner?

We shouldn't even be knowing about this £1, just as we basically know nothing about most deals besides conjecture and rumours on the internet.

Liverpool played ugly and yet you want to berate Arsenal, nice.

GM points out, this is the highest offer for a player after Torres.

flobaba

If you truly want to buy a house off it's owner, and you check and find out it's valued at 40million, you dont go offering the owner of the property 40million and 1, and expect an overwhelmingly favorable response, especially if it's their "favorite" or prized asset.

Now, I know it's not all apples here, but I think the principle applies.

mohan

flobaba wrote:
If you truly want to buy a house off it's owner, and you check and find out it's valued at 40million, you dont go offering the owner of the property 40million and 1, and expect an overwhelmingly favorable response.

Now, I know it's not all apples here, but I think the principle applies.

But thats the thing here.. its not valued at 40 mill, it has been told that anything more than 40 mill would trigger the sale and they have to sell. What do you do for a house in that case? You know you can get it for 40 mill and 1 pound. Do you offer more?

Mirth

flobaba wrote:
If you truly want to buy a house off it's owner, and you check and find out it's valued at 40million, you dont go offering the owner of the property 40million and 1, and expect an overwhelmingly favorable response, especially if it's their "favorite" or prized asset.

Now, I know it's not all apples here, but I think the principle applies.

We believed we were meeting a clause obviously. Not entering into negotiations, as soon as we heard that the clause was a sham we backed down.

In fact, had we known we had to negotiate for Suarez, I bet we would never have even tried.

You can't seriously think the club would just add a £1 to antagonise Liverpool? Whatever you want to say about the club, they're not a vindictive bunch.

Captain

If I want to buy a house, you can be damn sure I'm offering way under value. 😆

goon

It's all very pointless anyway, Liverpool wouldn't have accepted 42 or 45m either so if we managed to piss off those precious cunts all the better.

Qwiss

Captain wrote:
If I want to buy a house, you can be damn sure I'm offering way under value. 😆

If the owners aren't trying to sell that house that isn't going to work.

Qwiss

Anyway I'd rather not buy a racist house.

Captain

qs! wrote:
Captain wrote:
If I want to buy a house, you can be damn sure I'm offering way under value. 😆

If the owners aren't trying to sell that house that isn't going to work.

Well then I go buy a house that is for sale, the streets are lined with them. :hat:

Timbob

Even if the clause wasn't a proper release clause it was basically an invitation to auction. And if a house is up for auction with a reserve of £40m you ain't gonna offer anymore than you have to.

Glad we cleared that up.

« Previous Page Next Page »