• Current Donation Goals

Harvz

Transfer Talk Topic

Recommended Posts

Considering that he cost us an estimated 25m (http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/14432798), that's a lousy price for a striker that has banged them in at a spectacular rate for a young striker in a team outside of the top 4 for two seasons.

For one of the buys we got right, it is a very disappointing profit I agree.

But since he has already had 73 appearances for Anderlecht he was at least a more certain purchase than most of the buys that don't go straight to the first team.

Lukaku was a bad deal, regardless of whether or not he stays.

There was at least a logic to it, in that a great extra striker always comes in handy, and at the time we needed 3 in the near future. But it was a big bet for a player not likely to arrive in the first team for at least 3 years, and built the way you want a 28 year old striker to be built, not a 21 year old.

And as many have said already, he isn't the kind of player that fits into the system that we started building precisely 3 years ago.

Has there been a concrete report anywhere with quotes showing that Lukaku does not want to be here?

No - but there have been the usual attempts by the UK press to pretend that he has.

We treated him very badly in his first year, and I feel sure he was conned into joining us without realising that he would neither get picked nor go on loan for a year. Conned by the club or his agent I don't know.

Given that I'd forgive him all kinds of comments of the kind he hasn't yet made (and I wouldn't blame him if he made them after a move).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that he cost us an estimated €25m (http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/14432798), that's a lousy price for a striker that has banged them in at a spectacular rate for a young striker in a team outside of the top 4 for two seasons.

Oh yes - the BBC doing us a disservice as usual. Always quoting the asbolute highest number they can come up with.

It's widely believed that Chelsea paid a fee far below £20m with add-ons taking it to a potential £18m. Whether those clauses have been activated or not is hard to say for sure.

The fee we paid is a lot more likely to be in the region of £12-13m.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jay Seal   

Oh yes - the BBC doing us a disservice as usual. Always quoting the asbolute highest number they can come up with.

It's widely believed that Chelsea paid a fee far below £20m with add-ons taking it to a potential £18m. Whether those clauses have been activated or not is hard to say for sure.

The fee we paid is a lot more likely to be in the region of £12-13m.

Agreed, very hard to believe a large proportion of the add on clauses could have been triggered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scooba   

I'm sure Belgian media reported the fee as 13m euros rising to 18m with add-on's that clearly haven't been triggered. Wages won't be more than 40k a week either so in summary we stand to make decent money for Lukaku - if we sell him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes - the BBC doing us a disservice as usual. Always quoting the asbolute highest number they can come up with.

It's widely believed that Chelsea paid a fee far below £20m with add-ons taking it to a potential £18m. Whether those clauses have been activated or not is hard to say for sure.

The fee we paid is a lot more likely to be in the region of £12-13m.

Unless Anderlecht were very foolish, I would have thought alladd-on conditions would have been reached? I know he has done little in a Chelsea shirt, but he must have achieved a lot in terms of top league and international appearances and goals.

Edit: and as ever, Hazard supposedly came with a £6m agent's fee. I'd expect a substantial fee should be added to any EUR numbers that come out of Belgium.

Edited by Droy was my hero

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cam4blue   

Oh yes - the BBC doing us a disservice as usual. Always quoting the asbolute highest number they can come up with.

Some always quote the highest possible number because it suits their agenda and the narrative they have created; both in the media and on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure Belgian media reported the fee as 13m euros rising to 18m with add-on's that clearly haven't been triggered. Wages won't be more than 40k a week either so in summary we stand to make decent money for Lukaku - if we sell him.

Yep, that's right. I remember the likes of John Chapman (who follows Belgian football closely) repeatedly stating that 12/13 potentially rising to 18 was more accurate than 18-20 as many sources in the UK liked to suggest.

Edited by Bridge Soldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jones   

Oh yes - the BBC doing us a disservice as usual. Always quoting the asbolute highest number they can come up with.

It's widely believed that Chelsea paid a fee far below £20m with add-ons taking it to a potential £18m. Whether those clauses have been activated or not is hard to say for sure.

The fee we paid is a lot more likely to be in the region of £12-13m.

This. And where does it say Lukaku is sold?

Remember guys, Lukaku is part of what I believe is CFCs biggest project this summer: selling Torres. All speculation about Lukaku leaving is good for our negotiation situation. If Lukaku ends up being sold, which I believe becomes less likely day by day, it is because we did not manage to offload Torres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yes - the BBC doing us a disservice as usual. Always quoting the asbolute highest number they can come up with.

It's widely believed that Chelsea paid a fee far below £20m with add-ons taking it to a potential £18m. Whether those clauses have been activated or not is hard to say for sure.

The fee we paid is a lot more likely to be in the region of £12-13m.

Yeah, I find the figures on the BBC odd, for instance they state that Lukaku was a £20m buy, when all the reports in Belgium stated €13M rising to €18m, yet when it comes to Utd and Liverpool Shaw and Lallana are £27m and £23.4m. I mean, how do you even get £23.4m when the transaction would've been conducted in £'s?

Unless Anderlecht were very foolish, I would have thought alladd-on conditions would have been reached? I know he has done little in a Chelsea shirt, but he must have achieved a lot in terms of top league and international appearances and goals.

Edit: and as ever, Hazard supposedly came with a £6m agent's fee. I'd expect a substantial fee should be added to any EUR numbers that come out of Belgium.

I would've said that the add ons would've probably have related to - appearances, trophies, goals, international appearances. Now, it is impossible to say if my hunch is right or not and if it is what amount each add on accounts for, however, I would hazard a guess that we've not had to pay all of the add ons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now