Richarlison having a medical http://www.skysports.com/football/n...to-have-everton-medical-ahead-of-50m-transfer
The Pozzo family are tough, battle-hardened football veterans. They have decades of experience in running top flight football clubs. They know the football world inside out. They've negotiated a thousand deals. Moshiri is a jumped up, over-excited bean counter who's got lucky. He's a provincial office suit who's owned a football club for a whole two years now. In that time, he's pished away megafunds on a series of dismal but hyper-expensive flops and rubbishy panic buys. It's like a little lamb to the slaughter really. Is there anyone who doesn't think that every aspect of the tiny-nippled but big hootered Brazilian's deal will be very weighted heavily in our favour?
Burnsy: Would be the deal of the century if true but I do have to wonder how that would look if we are doing business with someone we are in litigation with over another matter. Seems bizarre to me. If anything it stengthens our case: 'M'lud, we had no choice but to sell our jewel as they turned his head back last season when they promised him he could go to Everton with his mentor' - and now offering bonkers money that nobody in their right mind would offer or turn down!
Everton fans. They're convinced that the Silva compensation is included in the deal and the actual fee is £25m + add-ons, but more and more noises are coming out saying that this is not the case. Do they really think that Gino would be considering this deal if it wasn't heavily weighted in our favour? We can only hope that full details of the deal are disclosed upon completion, just so it's clear how much we've rogered them.
Think in much more danger of going down than last . No basket cases like Sunderland and Villa, newcomers Wolves and Fulham made some good signings and last year's strugglers Huddersfield and Brighton have strengthened. Our squad has improved in certain areas but still worries at the back, an ageing Britos, injury prone Cathcart and a not to be seen Kaboul and up front arguably we are worse off than when we got promoted with a leaner, younger more focused Deeney and partner with a firing Ighalo or Vydra. Midfield looks ok but if Doucoure sold and Chalobah/Cleverly remain injured we are well and truly up the creek
You have to admire the bone-headed delusion of a certain stamp of Everton fan. Even they can't deny the obvious. They know that paying £50 million for a player who's had perhaps a dozen half decent games, before fading badly, is utter madness. They can't try to defend that as a fine bit of business, or a canny investment. The fact it's a lunatic, multi-million pound punt in the dark is obvious to everybody. So what to do? I know, pretend it hasn't happened. Close your eyes, put your hands over ears and go lah-lah-lah. The BBC, renowned the world over for its accuracy and honest reporting, says the fee is £50 million. So does just about every other major media outlet. Nonetheless, in the crazy imagination world of scousers, the fee continues to PLUNGE spectacularly based on a wishful tweets from other foam-flecked scousers and assorted perm and moustache jacklegs. What? £50 million? Noooooo! Ha ha ha ha! That'd be crazy that. No, no, no, no. Actually it's only £40 million. Did I say £40 (cough) I meant £35. And of course, a lot of that is like notional you know. Interest on the balance and that and spread out over 5 years, so you can't count that. And that makes it only £30. What? £25? Yeah, I expect so. Yeah, that's probably not far off. Or a bit less. Maybe £2o or so. And £15 million of that is the serpent supplement - compensation for Ssssilva. So that's only really £5 million we're paying. And that's gross. When you add on tax and national insurance, Watford are actually paying us to take him. Yeah. Really. No. Not many people actually realise that....
So how do we know they aren't right and its £25m plus add ons plus £15m compensation re Silva ? We are all guessing.
Maybe they've read this? https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/fo...l-want-damages-over-marco-silva-a3893726.html
https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/fo...&utm_source=Twitter&__twitter_impression=true So that fee isn't trying to settle the Marco Silva case then. They're just idiots paying that price.
We don't know. Not for absolute sure. But the Pozzo's are determined people, experienced in football business. If they said they weren't going to deal with Everton any more after what they did with Sssilva, it will surely have taken a truly imbecilic offer from them for Richie that made them change their minds. A deal where, in their opinion, they'd be dealing them their just desserts and getting vengeance better by accepting it, than by refusing it. And that won't be some rubbishy £25 mill.
Why would we include any "Silva compensation" in the transfer fee, when everyone knows we have to give 10% of the profit as a sell-on clause? We would have to transparently disclose the exact terms of the fee involved (& the staging of any add-ons) to FIFA so Fluminense could be 100% guaranteed their 10% as & when Everton made any required future payments. Inflating the actual transfer fee by including Silva's compensation would only mean we'd be paying them 10% of that compensation...does anyone really believe Gino would entertain such a stupid move?
Which like all the other variety of papers views is just a guess ? No-one knows and we will never know unless its announced.
This was covered yesterday. Moshiri(?) has more money than sense. Paying for a striker is great. Paying compensation for screwing up, not so great. It's only 10% so if compensation was agreed at say £10m, he may prefer to pay £11m and call it transfer fee.
Or we had the choice of £25m or a sulky Brazilian who wanted to leave and couldn't even get in the team for periods last spring ? We just don't know.
The same BBC who said World trade centre 7 had collapsed, when it could be clearly seen via live images behind them?
At the time I don't think many people knew what was standing or not with all the chaos/rumours/shock going on. In hindsight it was easy to spot the mistake but live? Hard to attack them for that one.
Understand your Point. My point is that they had given false news hours before they decided to pull down tower 7.
I understand from sources that there are some questions emerging from the medical. Those who are saying he's failed the medical are wrong, but I'm hearing there are one or two things that need clarification.
It's a strange scenario for sure, but if I'm taking legal action against someone and they want to buy a $100 bill from me for $200 in an unrelated transaction, I'm going to sell it to them.
'Jet fuel couldn't have caused those metal supports to melt.........' 'They said Tower 7 fell before it actually did.......' 'The plane that the terrorists crashed into a field was actually a drone.......' 9/11 is a conspiracy theorists wet dream......much like richarlison is silva's!
