Whilst it's with mixed emotions Cahill leaves us I make it that's ?23m for Gudjohnson, Anelka, & Cahill all at the peak of their careers. In an era when Chelsea spend billions I can't help thinking they have had PG over the barrell again!!

BWFC have a reputation for being pushovers in the transfer market.

 

It's a factor I tell thee.

 

with who? did this information come from all the premier league chairman you drink with? If Jones was 16 million and united paid that and cahill would have been 12 million why did united not go for him? players are only worth what clubs will pay. Cahill was not in that much demand as we received no firm bids.

 

I bet Cahill is the lowest valued current England international to move for less than ?8m for over a decade. Well done Garty a player we signed in 2008 for ?5m

 

i suggest you don't gamble too often then.

 

Spurs paid West Ham ?5.5m for Scott Parker:he won the Football Writers award last season and made the final 6 for PFA Player of the Year.

yeah, but what do the porn kings, brady and allardyce know about trading

 

amateurs

whats more, we haven't a clue of the ins and outs

 

maybe theres a hefty loan fee owing to chelsea

 

phil jones won't be on the wages cahill will get at chelsea

 

he wasn't 5 months from being a free agent

i suggest you don't gamble too often then.

 

Spurs paid West Ham ?5.5m for Scott Parker:he won the Football Writers award last season and made the final 6 for PFA Player of the Year.

 

Wasn't Joe Cole free to Liverpool?

Sorry but I'm inclined to agree with Tipster on this.

 

He should have should for at least ?10 million.

 

Bigger clubs seem able to bully our lot far too easily.

 

why ?

why ?

 

because he plays for bolton silly

why ?

 

Because, of course.

 

Sum people, dey so silly !

Edited December 30, 201114 yr by Pablo

 

 

why ?

 

Because yer Mam.

All you are pointing out there is poor negotiating skills by people on Bolton's board over the years.

In contrast Blackburn got ?15 million for David Bentley who obviously isn't fit to lace Anelka's boots and even the Venkys got ?16 million for Phil Jones who hadn't even played a full season for them.

 

When Alenka signed for Bolton the release clause was 8 Million, he signed a new deal which raised it to 14 million, we would have got an extra 2 million had Chelsea won the champs league,

 

Cahill has 4 months on his contract, do you honestly think that he is worth 16 million?

 

They was not any room for negotiation with the Gudjohnsen transfer, they offered 4 million take it or leave it, no other club made a bid, we had just missed out on promotion and were in serious shit financially, we were desperate to sell, they were not desperate to buy.

 

How do you propose that the board could have got a more lucrative fee from any of the above?

 

And you cannot compare the above transfers with the likes of Bentley, Jones etc etc as all circumstances surrounding each individual transfers are different.

 

Cahill has 4 months on his contract, do you honestly think that he is worth 16 million?

 

 

might be an England international

 

might be a centre back for the club thats conceded most this season...

 

pending on which view you have

He is worth whatever somebody is willing to pay

 

Chelsea are willing to pay 7m

So what you are saying is we made money out of it then

 

we didn't really make money though did we? ?5mill to buy him plus his wages over the period he's been here so we are probably selling at a loss

 

 

we didn't really make money though did we? ?5mill to buy him plus his wages over the period he's been here so we are probably selling at a loss

You can say that about 99% of transfers

we didn't really make money though did we? ?5mill to buy him plus his wages over the period he's been here so we are probably selling at a loss

 

well given we have to put a team out each week, we do need to have players and pay them so your point is nonsense.

 

you could argue we bought something for 4 years and at the end of 4 years it would have had no value as once out of contract we get nothing, therefore the money is nearly all profit.

we didn't really make money though did we? ?5mill to buy him plus his wages over the period he's been here so we are probably selling at a loss

 

well off that theory we have never made money as all players need paying.

Shouldn't the expenditure of his wages now go as a credit on the balance sheet?

He is worth whatever somebody is willing to pay

 

Chelsea are willing to pay 7m

 

Absofuckinglutely. Supply and demand. We don't know any of the ins and outs of the situation, everything is pure speculation. A defender who's been part of the worse defence in the league is what we have, with only 4 months left. ?7 mill may be a good bit of business.

Whilst it's with mixed emotions Cahill leaves us I make it that's ?23m for Gudjohnson, Anelka, & Cahill all at the peak of their careers. In an era when Chelsea spend billions I can't help thinking they have had PG over the barrell again!!

 

We can wait till July and get nowt, might as well get 7m now as according to Bolton News we are on the bones of our arse as it is

Absofuckinglutely. Supply and demand. We don't know any of the ins and outs of the situation, everything is pure speculation. A defender who's been part of the worse defence in the league is what we have, with only 4 months left. ?7 mill may be a good bit of business.

 

Which turns into fact on here, as well you know

Shouldn't the expenditure of his wages now go as a credit on the balance sheet?

 

Don't be daft, that'd Fook up the tax fiddles, do keep up

If we get ?7,000,000 for Cahill (I would think it will be lower) it represents a great return at this point for the club.

daylight fucking robbery if you ask me...

What's the record fee for a player in jan, who only has 6 months left of his contract?