Outgoing? Kyle Walker to move on...

[Dkc]

Kyle should have insisted on a clause in the contract that any profit should be distributed amongst Blades fans. If that was the case we'd all be due about 200 quid each.

 

[mattbianco1]

I find it hilarious that City missed out on Alves on a free so rectify the situation by spending £50m on their next best option. Mental.

They said they wanted both

 

[seanbeenstattoo]

They said they wanted both

I am so fucking bored of people posting the truth. Just fucking stop.

 

[wizadry]

Great move for Walker, his family and for the Blades in general.

If we'd have sold Walker for let's say £25m back when we did when he was worth quite a lot of money, where money was getting spunked away anyway, we'd have now only earned £2.5m from the deal instead of the £5m we're going to get, all this at a time where we can finally trust a manager to spend it very wisely indeed.

 

[Bladeinleeds]

Great move for Walker, his family and for the Blades in general.

If we'd have sold Walker for let's say £25m back when we did when he was worth quite a lot of money, where money was getting spunked away anyway, we'd have now only earned £2.5m from the deal instead of the £5m we're going to get, all this at a time where we can finally trust a manager to spend it very wisely indeed.

With hindsight c10m (in total) isn't actually a bad price for walker at that stage of his career.

Obviously would have been ideal to keep him but we have always been a selling club and let's be honest we would have kept him for another year (at best) and got maybe 6-7m for him. There's much more money in the game now and in fairness to spurs they have genuinely helped to develope him into a world class player

Now it's a cash boost without losing an asset and can be given to a manager that can actually be trusted to spend it. Probably in the same way that c5m for Maguire was prob as good as we could hope for rotting in league one

 

[SB_90]

 

[YES Blade]

With hindsight c10m (in total) isn't actually a bad price for walker at that stage of his career.

Obviously would have been ideal to keep him but we have always been a selling club and let's be honest we would have kept him for another year (at best) and got maybe 6-7m for him. There's much more money in the game now and in fairness to spurs they have genuinely helped to develope him into a world class player

Now it's a cash boost without losing an asset and can be given to a manager that can actually be trusted to spend it. Probably in the same way that c5m for Maguire was prob as good as we could hope for rotting in league one

There is no hindsight with Walker, any blade that watched him play for us and couldn't see that he was destined for the top should pack up watching football!

 

[Grizzly blade]

Surely if this sell on fee is right...and other than a bit of scaremongering from one or two about a clause being bought out I haven't seen anything which backs that up, then we should be paid as soon as the transfer is completed.

If you sell a house then it's all completed with solicitors to make sure the money is paid to the right people. Estate agent etc.

In a football transfer of more complex nature then I would like to think that something similar would be put together so that the buying club, in this case City, actually send the monies owed to us, rather than sending it all to spurs and them then being responsible for sending us our cut.

My only concern, is the lack of transparency and the devious nature of Levy. But you would like to think our owners will have dealt with such figures in business and be well prepared to deal with it. Having a vested interest in the sale I'm sure we will be keeping a very close eye on things. Perhaps even being in contact through legal teams to keep tabs.

Whatever happens I certainly don't expect any announcement from united for obvious reasons.

 

[TJB.]

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

Bramhall? Fucking Bramhall?!

 

[Darthblade]

Surely if this sell on fee is right...and other than a bit of scaremongering from one or two about a clause being bought out I haven't seen anything which backs that up, then we should be paid as soon as the transfer is completed.

If you sell a house then it's all completed with solicitors to make sure the money is paid to the right people. Estate agent etc.

In a football transfer of more complex nature then I would like to think that something similar would be put together so that the buying club, in this case City, actually send the monies owed to us, rather than sending it all to spurs and them then being responsible for sending us our cut.

My only concern, is the lack of transparency and the devious nature of Levy. But you would like to think our owners will have dealt with such figures in business and be well prepared to deal with it. Having a vested interest in the sale I'm sure we will be keeping a very close eye on things. Perhaps even being in contact through legal teams to keep tabs.

Whatever happens I certainly don't expect any announcement from united for obvious reasons.

Bearing in mind the "fabulous" negotiating skills that our Board have demonstrated in the past with "sell-on-clauses" ...... I wouldn't hold your breath

Levy will have butt-fu**ed them without them even knowing it !! You will probably find that the small print of the sell-on clause said " if he's sold on in July of any year before 2075, Blades owe us £5m"

UTB & FTP

 

[Fanny magnet]

Bearing in mind the "fabulous" negotiating skills that our Board have demonstrated in the past with "sell-on-clauses" ...... I wouldn't hold your breath

Levy will have butt-fu**ed them without them even knowing it !! You will probably find that the small print of the sell-on clause said " if he's sold on in July of any year before 2075, Blades owe us £5m"

UTB & FTP

Or maybe not