Incoming? Sam Gallagher

[LJBlade]

Today's Star again insisting it would be a loan deal.

Unless we agree a set price to buy at the end of it, this would be poor from us having just sold Brooks.

Maybe Southampton are asking for more than Wilder is willing to pay?

 

[LJBlade]

Only us could have an 'acceptable budget', sell a 12m player and end up with a budget of 3m.

Or maybe it's 'only us' that has a manager who isn't willing to spend his entire budget on one player.

 

[LJBlade]

Tbh, I'd rather do a loan to buy option with Gallagher than get him outright. He's got ability and Wilder clearly rates him but at the same time he will cost a lot and in our position we can't afford to spend £3m on anyone who could potentially be a flop (no matter how much of a sure bet they might be).

I do agree though, if it's just a loan deal with no option for a permenant then I'd be very disappointed. That just means if he does well then he'll probably end up well out of our price range next season.

The loan fee will be closer to £3m than the transfer fee.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Or it gives us a chance to look at him and see if he’s any good, his goals to games ratio isn’t the best

Agree, however, if he bangs 'em in, we won't be getting him for 3m....

In fact, we wont be getting him.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

Or maybe it's 'only us' that has a manager who isn't willing to spend his entire budget on one player.

Entire budget?

 

[LJBlade]

Entire budget?

What is the budget and how much will Gallagher cost?

Entire budget was an exaggeration.

 

[Chief_Froley]

Given what we've just received for Brooks, on top of what was already a 'competitive' budget, we should be in a position to spend £3m on players who'd be less sure bets than Gallagher. He'd also cost more than £3m but considering we'll probably only spend fees on two others and that he'd be the main signing, we could afford and justify it.
His value is also safe as long as he doesn't have a disastrous season, especially in this ever inflating market.

An option to buy that Southampton can't wriggle out of would be decent but there's still the possibility that after a decent season he could reject us and sign for someone offering 30k p/w+.

When weighing everything up, I think the best option for us would be to commit to a permanent deal now.

Agreed, I think for the current market he is probably our best option within our price range and would also probably be our safest investment given his age and pedigree.

At the same time, there is an element of risk as in his most recent season he brought a grand total of 6 goals. So what's to say that he is all of a sudden going to turn into a 20 goal a season striker and not just simply do the same thing? If he does other teams certainly won't want to pay that much for him when we look to sell

There's also the reality that this is a player that could potentially command a fee that's more than 5 times what Wilder has spent on a single player in all his time here. That's a hell of a big step up in spending and the board will definitely expect immediate performances from Gallagher or anyone else who comes in for that kind of money. If Wilder wants to take any steps to minimise any kind of risk then I don't blame him.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

What is the budget and how much will Gallagher cost?

Entire budget was an exaggeration.

I was only thinking of the cost that's been banded around here, but as someone has already alluded to, 3m is more likely to be closer to the loan fee than the xfer fee.

I've already said I don't rate him anyway, seen nothing from him to be spending those kind of sums.

 

[DronnieBlade]

I was only thinking of the cost that's been banded around here, but as someone has already alluded to, 3m is more likely to be closer to the loan fee than the xfer fee.

I've already said I don't rate him anyway, seen nothing from him to be spending those kind of sums.

If the loan fee is anywhere near £3m, plus the players wages, we wouldn’t be dragging this one out as that would be pure madness for any Championship club (unless Rednapp manages to blag another job that is !!).

UTB.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

If the loan fee is anywhere near £3m, plus the players wages, we wouldn’t be dragging this one out as that would be pure madness for any Championship club (unless Rednapp manages to blag another job that is !!).

UTB.

You'd think so yeah, however weren't they wanting something like 8m last season when Birmingham took him on loan instead?

 

[Chief_Froley]

The loan fee will be closer to £3m than the transfer fee.

Like I said before I was going off of reported valuations. If he costs more than that then the main point I was making about us having to tread carefully with financial outlays is surely more valid.

 

[zablade]

Agree, however, if he bangs 'em in, we won't be getting him for 3m....

In fact, we wont be getting him.

We will if we go up..

 

[LJBlade]

Like I said before I was going off of reported valuations. If he costs more than that then the main point I was making about us having to tread carefully with financial outlays is surely more valid.

It's definitely valid, it's pretty much the same point I was trying to make.

Where has £3m been reported by the way?

 

[Chief_Froley]

It's definitely valid, it's pretty much the same point I was trying to make.

Where has £3m been reported by the way?

I can't remember where I read it tbh. Its possible I saw it on one of the many 'credible' news sources available on the Web so it's quite possible for me to be talking bollocks

I at least know that Birmingham paid 1.2m last season to loan him so it's safe to assume its gonna be about the same this time round.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&s...BhAB&usg=AOvVaw1HeCeD-vFl9vDN7VqnDikE&ampcf=1

 

[Broomhall Blade]

I believe in CW is a man of his word. I don’t believe he would have stayed unless he has some backing. He could have moved to many clubs this close season but he stayed and it’s not for money. So it’s because he has a project he believes in.

Like I keep saying everyone is negative on here for weeks and we make one good signing all will change. So why not sit back and wait?

I was being sarcastic .
Did you really think i believe Utd would sell Clarke for 50k and a friendly come on.


75k a friendly and 25% sell on clause we would snap their hands off.

 

[Boxer Blade]

It's definitely valid, it's pretty much the same point I was trying to make.

Where has £3m been reported by the way?

It probably hasn't but you can guarantee within the next seven days it will be a definite ,everybody will be quoting it, it's just the way it is.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Today's Star again insisting it would be a loan deal.

Unless we agree a set price to buy at the end of it, this would be poor from us having just sold Brooks.

Hmm, not sure I agree. Why would a loan, giving us money to spend elsewhere (minus loan fee) be poor?

 

[Bladezz]

I was being sarcastic .
Did you really think i believe Utd would sell Clarke for 50k and a friendly come on.


75k a friendly and 25% sell on clause we would snap their hands off.

It was the only bit of your post I took serious as well!

 

[Ricky]

Hmm, not sure I agree. Why would a loan, giving us money to spend elsewhere (minus loan fee) be poor?

Would be OK for next season, but beyond that?

It's far better to own your players. We've got to look to build, reinvest properly and replace Brooks with other assets. And what better to spend on than a striker to build our forward line around who'll only get better? One likely to do well in our team who could be unattainable this time next year?

It also looks like our other striker signing will be a loan. Two loans would not make any sense - unless you could guarantee promotion.

Gallagher and a young attacking midfielder or another striker would be the best way to reinvest the Brooks money. Maddison or Armstrong for example.

We've got to use this budget opportunity to build something good.

 

[Blade58]

Would be OK for next season, but beyond that?

It's far better to own your players. We've got to look to build, reinvest properly and replace Brooks with other assets. And what better to spend on than a striker to build our forward line around who'll only get better? One likely to do well in our team who could be unattainable this time next year?

It also looks like our other striker signing will be a loan. Two loans would not make any sense - unless you could guarantee promotion.

Gallagher and a young attacking midfielder or another striker would be the best way to reinvest the Brooks money. Maddison or Armstrong for example.

We've got to use this budget opportunity to build something good.

Wonder what's happened to the Egan rumours as we are still after a cb

 

[Ricky]

Wonder what's happened to the Egan rumours as we are still after a cb

Our chances will improve there if Brentford do what we couldn't and resist a £12m offer for a promising 20 year old.

If they keep hold of Mepham, Egan will be more dispensable.

But Leeds are also said to be in for him, and they're richer than us...

 

[LJBlade]

Would be OK for next season, but beyond that?

It's far better to own your players. We've got to look to build, reinvest properly and replace Brooks with other assets. And what better to spend on than a striker to build our forward line around who'll only get better? One likely to do well in our team who could be unattainable this time next year?

It also looks like our other striker signing will be a loan. Two loans would not make any sense - unless you could guarantee promotion.

Gallagher and a young attacking midfielder or another striker would be the best way to reinvest the Brooks money. Maddison or Armstrong for example.

We've got to use this budget opportunity to build something good.

Who's the other striker we look like loaning?

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Would be OK for next season, but beyond that?

It's far better to own your players. We've got to look to build, reinvest properly and replace Brooks with other assets. And what better to spend on than a striker to build our forward line around who'll only get better? One likely to do well in our team who could be unattainable this time next year?

It also looks like our other striker signing will be a loan. Two loans would not make any sense - unless you could guarantee promotion.

Gallagher and a young attacking midfielder or another striker would be the best way to reinvest the Brooks money. Maddison or Armstrong for example.

We've got to use this budget opportunity to build something good.

I think you would have blown the budget. How do you estimate Gallagher would be available for, and do you not think he's going to want very high wages?

 

[LJBlade]

I think you would have blown the budget. How do you estimate Gallagher would be available for, and do you not think he's going to want very high wages?

According to the Mirror he's on £10k a week at Southampton but got a pay rise to £18k when he went on loan to Birmingham. Whether we can afford that or not I wouldn't presume to know.

I can't see Southampton wanting any less than £8m for him.

 

[Ricky]

Who's the other striker we look like loaning?

Hogan is the obvious target, and it's been reported today we're trying to loan him - logically the only way we could get him.

I think it's clear we're after Gallagher and Hogan as a duo.

Then if not Hogan, I think that smaller, quicker type of striker is more likely to be a loan.

I'd expect Wilder to be more inclined to invest in a line leading CF.

I think you would have blown the budget. How do you estimate Gallagher would be available for, and do you not think he's going to want very high wages?

I'd say anything from an initial £3.5m, rising to at least £5m. I don't think we'll want to go higher than £5m.

Wages, I think he's on about 18k p/w at Southampton, so 15k p/w, a decent signing on fee and bonuses should suffice.

 

[Blade58]

twirlo:

"wages agreed again for galla and offers in for hogan chelsea man u liverpool reserves on loan. player from scotland. i'll learn more tomorrow"



hope there's somat in that

 

[Booker4]

twirlo:

"wages agreed again for galla and offers in for hogan chelsea man u liverpool reserves on loan. player from scotland. i'll learn more tomorrow"



hope there's somat in that

Great if we get Hogan and Gallagher but not overly keen on both as loans and if we don't go up then having to start again next summer having added value to someone else's assets.

 

[FriethBlade]

Don't think they will both be loans. With the improved budget and 12m for Brooks we must be able.to afford the Gallagher fee, even if it's £6m ?

 

[Torrix1889]

twirlo:

"wages agreed again for galla and offers in for hogan chelsea man u liverpool reserves on loan. player from scotland. i'll learn more tomorrow"



hope there's somat in that

Who or what is "twirlo"?

 

[Ricky]

If we get those two strikers on loan.... then no way are we adequately reinvesting the Brooks fee.

Unless we go and splash £5m apiece on a centre half and attacking midfielder?