surely it won't suit West Ham, since they'll get less cash

If they only rate Milner as worth ?1.5m (say) and Ashton at ?10m, why on earth would they accept ?7m + Milner just to avoid paying our relatively small share of the sell-on? They'd only be getting ?8.5m for a player they think is worth ?10m.

Posted By: mr carra on July 18th 2006 at 10:55:46

Message Thread

Sorry if this is WW2 (NCFC) - conker, Jul 18, 10:10:29
- Can we spend the 15% on Michael Owen? (NCFC) - Tomblander, Jul 18, 10:11:31
  - We wouldnt make any money out of it! (NCFC) - conker, Jul 18, 10:15:55
    - don't understand this (NCFC) - mr carra, Jul 18, 10:29:02
      - Think it is cash only. Otherwise they can wrangle it and Newcastle will (NCFC) - Steve in Holland, Jul 18, 10:31:13
        
        you're contradicting yourself there (NCFC) - mr carra, Jul 18, 10:33:22
        
        Sorry I meant that the sell-on clause works on cash-only deals (n/m) (NCFC) - Steve in Holland, Jul 18, 10:34:11
        
        if we agreed ... (NCFC) - mr carra, Jul 18, 10:37:50
        
        Yeah but I think it suits both parties AND Milner if they overvalue him... (NCFC) - Steve in Holland, Jul 18, 10:51:27
        
        surely it won't suit West Ham, since they'll get less cash (NCFC) - mr carra, Jul 18, 10:55:46
    - perhaps we'll get a leg though? (n/m) (NCFC) - Tomblander, Jul 18, 10:23:16

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.