James Tarkowski in the news

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
jojomk1
Posts: 4735
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:20 am
Been Liked: 836 times
Has Liked: 574 times

James Tarkowski in the news

Post by jojomk1 » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:17 am

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... lause.html

Glad we have such a high release clause if true

tim_noone
Posts: 17108
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:12 pm
Been Liked: 4384 times
Has Liked: 15117 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by tim_noone » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:19 am

Bite their Hand off.....

ClaretTony
Posts: 67429
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
Been Liked: 32238 times
Has Liked: 5254 times
Location: Burnley
Contact:

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by ClaretTony » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:22 am

Isn't that the same story from the same club as a year ago?
This user liked this post: k90bfc

Rowls
Posts: 13163
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
Been Liked: 5065 times
Has Liked: 5124 times
Location: Montpellier, France

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Rowls » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:24 am

He did not “quickly establish himself” at Turf Moor - he had to wait over a season before he became a regular.

warksclaret
Posts: 6594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
Been Liked: 1676 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by warksclaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:32 am

The interesting story in one of the tabloids is that Henderson the GK on loan to Sheff Utd will not sign a new contract with Man Utd unless he becomes No 1 keeper at Old Trafford-if you can believe this.

This has led the press to speculate that Chelsea would bid £55m for Henderson to solve their GK problem

Wellsy1882
Posts: 1374
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2020 10:35 pm
Been Liked: 247 times
Has Liked: 90 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Wellsy1882 » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:35 am

Id sell him for 30 mil

cricketfieldclarets
Posts: 21464
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
Been Liked: 8585 times
Has Liked: 11285 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by cricketfieldclarets » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:35 am

jojomk1 wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:17 am
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... lause.html

Glad we have such a high release clause if true
If Gibson hadnt been a naughty boy this would have been a tempting situation. In fact would have been a no brainer. (Yes I know Gibson is a left footer).

If they offered £50m and we could strike a deal to get Keane back for less, then would be something to consider.

nyclaret
Posts: 1213
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 12:57 am
Been Liked: 335 times
Has Liked: 163 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by nyclaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:44 am

Wellsy1882 wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:35 am
Id sell him for 30 mil
:lol:

dpinsussex
Posts: 3554
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:15 am
Been Liked: 1047 times
Has Liked: 1187 times
Location: Reading

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by dpinsussex » Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:52 am

Wellsy1882 wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:35 am
Id sell him for 30 mil
Put that rod away :)

NewClaret
Posts: 13224
Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2019 9:51 am
Been Liked: 3037 times
Has Liked: 3759 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by NewClaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:28 am

I thought release clauses were banned in UK contracts?

Imagine Leicester now feel more comfortable about their CB situation than they did last year. If they weren’t prepared to splash £50m last year after selling Maguire I can’t see why they would now, having developed a decent pairing. If he did go, it may be for cover and that would not be good for his career.

Another opportunity will open up for him if his form continues.

AlargeClaret
Posts: 4428
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:55 pm
Been Liked: 1148 times
Has Liked: 180 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by AlargeClaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:32 am

100m for Tarky and Pope would be superb business. We’d need to splash to replace Tarky though

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by FactualFrank » Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:34 am

AlargeClaret wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:32 am
100m for Tarky and Pope would be superb business. We’d need to splash to replace Tarky though
We'd need a backup/first team keeper, and with Gibson leaving too, we'd arguably need 2 CBs. It would be a challenge to replace them.

summitclaret
Posts: 3891
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
Been Liked: 826 times
Has Liked: 1307 times
Location: burnley

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by summitclaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:59 am

FactualFrank wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 11:34 am
We'd need a backup/first team keeper, and with Gibson leaving too, we'd arguably need 2 CBs. It would be a challenge to replace them.
Maybe, but surely we are prepared for it all. Tarks must be wanted by many atm and the shortlist for Gibson's replacement already being actioned.

jedi_master
Posts: 7104
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:33 pm
Been Liked: 3580 times
Has Liked: 1023 times
Location: Chesterfield

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by jedi_master » Wed Aug 05, 2020 12:08 pm

I'd rather keep Tarky than Pope or McNeil, if we were selling one.

The club could not turn down £100m for Pope and Tarkowski though, it just couldn't. That's almost like another seasons worth of Premier League income just given to us.

Tarky is an outstanding player though and would be nigh on impossible to replace like for like, but, Dyche knows how to make a CB a real player. I'd back him to get someone in and surprise us.

BurnleyFC
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:51 am
Been Liked: 1596 times
Has Liked: 888 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by BurnleyFC » Wed Aug 05, 2020 12:11 pm

If Leicester can sell Big Head for £80m then they can pay £80m for Tarky.
These 2 users liked this post: Taffy on the wing MT03ALG

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by FactualFrank » Wed Aug 05, 2020 12:27 pm

BurnleyFC wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 12:11 pm
If Leicester can sell Big Head for £80m then they can pay £80m for Tarky.
Given there's a £50m release clause, I don't imagine they'd offer £80m.
This user liked this post: jojomk1

gandhisflipflop
Posts: 5500
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:05 pm
Been Liked: 2317 times
Has Liked: 1399 times
Location: Costa del Padihamos beach.

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by gandhisflipflop » Wed Aug 05, 2020 12:46 pm

Not a chance I'd be selling tarkowski or anyone this summer unless we get absolute stupid amounts offered (80m plus for pope and similar for tarks). The reason being is the quick turnaround. It is absolutely imperative that we have the core of our team in place because they have a full understanding of our system. Any sales in crucial areas this summer doesn't leave a lot of time at all to become 'alligned' and 'dyche fit'. We simply don't have a full pre season to drill the system into any potential new partnership. A solution would be to start the season with long and mee and BPF but that would be a gamble.

MACCA
Posts: 15591
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:10 am
Been Liked: 4360 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by MACCA » Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:07 pm

If we fail to get a club to hit the 50m release fee this summer, then I think we would struggle to get much more than 25m next summer when his deal would only have 12 months left on it, and he'd be free to talk to clubs from January of that season.

We might see it as the last chance to get the 50m, and to be fair it would be a great deal for this club, IF it meant Mr Dyche could bring in 2 or 3 players he wanted, that are upgrades on what we have, and can genuinely be considered first team players.

Bfcboyo
Posts: 1965
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 8:30 pm
Been Liked: 441 times
Has Liked: 355 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Bfcboyo » Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:20 pm

With the current revenue situation we may see a few go for less than their worth.

BFC would never do that would they?

ŽižkovClaret
Posts: 6962
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 2145 times
Has Liked: 3063 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by ŽižkovClaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:31 pm

*Deleted Post*
Last edited by ŽižkovClaret on Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

ŽižkovClaret
Posts: 6962
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 2145 times
Has Liked: 3063 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by ŽižkovClaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:35 pm

Or is it this seasons? ive been wfh too long ha

TVC15
Posts: 8211
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3321 times
Has Liked: 601 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by TVC15 » Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:35 pm

Bfcboyo wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:20 pm
With the current revenue situation we may see a few go for less than their worth.

BFC would never do that would they?
If the market moves it’s all relative as the players we would be interested in buying would also be cheaper.

Luckily we have a £50m release clause which means we don’t have to sell.

Either way we have done a pretty incredible job with out transfer sales in the last 8 years so I’m not sure what you are getting at. It’s the reason our net spend is so little compared to almost every other team in the league and the reason why we have continued to post good profits despite the big increases in our wage bill.

cricketfieldclarets
Posts: 21464
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:59 pm
Been Liked: 8585 times
Has Liked: 11285 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by cricketfieldclarets » Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:43 pm

MACCA wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:07 pm
If we fail to get a club to hit the 50m release fee this summer, then I think we would struggle to get much more than 25m next summer when his deal would only have 12 months left on it, and he'd be free to talk to clubs from January of that season.

We might see it as the last chance to get the 50m, and to be fair it would be a great deal for this club, IF it meant Mr Dyche could bring in 2 or 3 players he wanted, that are upgrades on what we have, and can genuinely be considered first team players.
But he could bring more than £25m in value anyway. Sometimes losing a player towards the end of the contract isnt a bad thing. It means we have got longer out of them and they have paid their worth in a different way.

TVC15
Posts: 8211
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 3321 times
Has Liked: 601 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by TVC15 » Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:08 pm

Tarks will also be thinking about next years Euros and the best way to break into the team.
Based on last season and especially since the restart I don’t think there was an English centre back who played aswell as Tarks did.

Tarks will surely look at his mate Michael Keane and what happened to his form and England career when he joined Everton.
Hopefully Tarks will think continuing to stand out for Burnley as he does will get him in the team for a big international tournament which has got to be any players dream and his inevitable move to a bigger club will happen after.
And there is no reason I can see with Tarks that it can’t be one of the big 6 clubs - he’d walk into Chelsea Spurs, and Arsenal team in that position. He’s probably good enough to partner Maguire at United and Laporte at City and he’s been better than Gomez at Liverpool this season.
These 2 users liked this post: summitclaret evensteadiereddie

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Spijed » Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:13 pm

TVC15 wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:08 pm
Tarks will also be thinking about next years Euros and the best way to break into the team.
Based on last season and especially since the restart I don’t think there was an English centre back who played aswell as Tarks did.

Tarks will surely look at his mate Michael Keane and what happened to his form and England career when he joined Everton.
Hopefully Tarks will think continuing to stand out for Burnley as he does will get him in the team for a big international tournament which has got to be any players dream and his inevitable move to a bigger club will happen after.
And there is no reason I can see with Tarks that it can’t be one of the big 6 clubs - he’d walk into Chelsea Spurs, and Arsenal team in that position. He’s probably good enough to partner Maguire at United and Laporte at City and he’s been better than Gomez at Liverpool this season.
Gomez is a prime example of a player looking better than he actually is because he plays next to VVD

DanH90
Posts: 178
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2020 7:29 pm
Been Liked: 130 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by DanH90 » Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:30 pm

I really don’t think selling Tarkowksi is the right move, even if a big offer comes in (I appreciate 50m might leave us no choice due to the release clause) I cannot think of one centre half we could realistically sign who would be remotely of his class, even if we spent the whole 50m.

MACCA
Posts: 15591
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:10 am
Been Liked: 4360 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by MACCA » Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:31 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:43 pm
But he could bring more than £25m in value anyway. Sometimes losing a player towards the end of the contract isnt a bad thing. It means we have got longer out of them and they have paid their worth in a different way.
Possibly, I'm not sure the board will see it like that though.

I think they know SD has been performing miracles keeping us up, and even with Tarky gone and a new CB brought in, I think we would still be ok.
Remember the aim of our board every season is to finish 17th or higher and make as much money as possible.

Hopefully if Tarky did leave for 50m, it would allow is to strengthen 3 areas of the team, and still post profits as we will hopefully have the net spend at 0

Hedontplayforyou
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 545 times
Has Liked: 51 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Hedontplayforyou » Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:35 pm

Would keep at all costs

LoveCurryPies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:00 am
Been Liked: 1599 times
Has Liked: 679 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by LoveCurryPies » Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:54 pm

It’s the lad’s career you’re talking about. He’s been terrific for us. If a large club comes in with a great offer, we have to let him take his chance. Bank the cash and use it to fund a few signings.

I’d sooner we kept McNeill, Pope and Mee.

MACCA
Posts: 15591
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:10 am
Been Liked: 4360 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by MACCA » Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:22 pm

Hedontplayforyou wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:35 pm
Would keep at all costs
That's out of our hands should a club come in with 50m

Sad thing is, is when Brentford take their cut, we could be left with under 40m.
Its massive money to us, but it only gets us 1 or 2 proven premier league players at best.

Billy Balfour
Posts: 3979
Joined: Mon May 28, 2018 3:00 pm
Been Liked: 1857 times
Has Liked: 652 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Billy Balfour » Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:39 pm

And then there's the taxman's cut as well.

burnleymik
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2018 9:00 pm
Been Liked: 1162 times
Has Liked: 2899 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by burnleymik » Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:57 pm

I feel he is our best player, would be gutted to see him go.

warksclaret
Posts: 6594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
Been Liked: 1676 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by warksclaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 4:38 pm

Could we not extend his contract to prevent him being a "dimishing assett", unlike the Hendrick situation

Giftonsnoidea
Posts: 1360
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 9:56 pm
Been Liked: 225 times
Has Liked: 248 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Giftonsnoidea » Wed Aug 05, 2020 5:58 pm

No replacement on the bench so no sale for me unless the scouts have someone lined up, hopefully not Akela

jojomk1
Posts: 4735
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:20 am
Been Liked: 836 times
Has Liked: 574 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by jojomk1 » Wed Aug 05, 2020 6:19 pm

MACCA wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 3:22 pm
That's out of our hands should a club come in with 50m

Sad thing is, is when Brentford take their cut, we could be left with under 40m.
Its massive money to us, but it only gets us 1 or 2 proven premier league players at best.
But JT wasn't a proven premier league player when we bought him - he was very good, and there should be more like him somewhere Mr Rigg?

Surely that is the pathway we have to follow - we don't have the financial clout (or even kudos) to battle against other top level clubs for proven PL players

Tarks still has a very good chance of getting to the Euro's next year but he will have to be playing every game, and it would be a big personal risk for him to move to another club when not certain to start

If we are serious about keeping this guy then a new contract offer should be on the table this summer

JohnMac
Posts: 7180
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:11 pm
Been Liked: 2367 times
Has Liked: 3781 times
Location: Padiham

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by JohnMac » Wed Aug 05, 2020 6:34 pm

Maybe 20% of any fee is going to Brentford, they will be able to sign some real gems with a nest egg like that. I just hope we can keep Tarky for another season, he has been nothing short of excellent and I don't think we can really replace from within without taking a huge gamble on a youngster.

No good speculating about a replacement, I'll leave that to Dyche!

jrgbfc
Posts: 8421
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 10:30 pm
Been Liked: 2098 times
Has Liked: 336 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by jrgbfc » Wed Aug 05, 2020 6:44 pm

warksclaret wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 4:38 pm
Could we not extend his contract to prevent him being a "dimishing assett", unlike the Hendrick situation
Only if he was willing to sign one. Which I'm not sure he would, realistically if he wants to further his career he needs to move on in the next year or so. He's coming into his prime and this could be his only chance of getting a big move.

k90bfc
Posts: 461
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 9:15 pm
Been Liked: 114 times
Has Liked: 5445 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by k90bfc » Wed Aug 05, 2020 7:51 pm

If Tarky wants to stay at Burnley,He will,If he doesnt he will move,does he want to move ,the grass is not always greener,Sean will sort it!

scouseclaret
Posts: 2596
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:29 pm
Been Liked: 857 times
Has Liked: 264 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by scouseclaret » Wed Aug 05, 2020 9:00 pm

If £80m for Maguire is the benchmark, I’d be surprised if someone doesn’t offer the release fee, and Tarkowski will probably go for the higher wages and to enhance his England chances.

For all his frequent visits to the Turf, Southgate seems reluctant to pick our players. On last seasons form, he and Pope should be shoo-ins for the squad, if not the team.

wickdkewlclaret
Posts: 592
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:12 pm
Been Liked: 141 times
Has Liked: 81 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by wickdkewlclaret » Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:01 am

Do Brentford have a sell on clause?

BenWickes
Posts: 2000
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 6:27 pm
Been Liked: 645 times
Has Liked: 470 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by BenWickes » Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:34 am

wickdkewlclaret wrote:
Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:01 am
Do Brentford have a sell on clause?
25% sell on fee I think. Rumours of Everton's interest for £40 million. Nixon suggested Brentford would get £10 million of that so. If true, they'd get £12.5 million of a £50 million deal.

claretandy
Posts: 4751
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 953 times
Has Liked: 238 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by claretandy » Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:48 am

BenWickes wrote:
Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:34 am
25% sell on fee I think. Rumours of Everton's interest for £40 million. Nixon suggested Brentford would get £10 million of that so. If true, they'd get £12.5 million of a £50 million deal.
This is one thing that we need to nip in the bud, giving substantial sell-on clauses, i'd rather pay a little more in the first place and lower the sell-on clauses.

Juan Tanamera
Posts: 2141
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 761 times
Has Liked: 10008 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Juan Tanamera » Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:57 am

C'mon folks, this is the Daily Mail.
As if they are privy to any information about a release clause.
If there is one at all.

Jenny55
Posts: 195
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:19 am
Been Liked: 63 times
Has Liked: 52 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Jenny55 » Thu Aug 06, 2020 2:50 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:
Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:35 am
If Gibson hadnt been a naughty boy this would have been a tempting situation. In fact would have been a no brainer. (Yes I know Gibson is a left footer).

If they offered £50m and we could strike a deal to get Keane back for less, then would be something to consider.
What did Gibson do to be a naughty boy?

Burnley1989
Posts: 7345
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:19 am
Been Liked: 2274 times
Has Liked: 2153 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Burnley1989 » Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:17 pm

claretandy wrote:
Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:48 am
This is one thing that we need to nip in the bud, giving substantial sell-on clauses, i'd rather pay a little more in the first place and lower the sell-on clauses.
If only it was that easy mate

Down_Rover
Posts: 1749
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:09 pm
Been Liked: 445 times
Has Liked: 187 times
Location: Manchester

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by Down_Rover » Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:31 pm

claretandy wrote:
Thu Aug 06, 2020 7:48 am
This is one thing that we need to nip in the bud, giving substantial sell-on clauses, i'd rather pay a little more in the first place and lower the sell-on clauses.
But if you pay more you always lose. Paying out of realised profits is always safer
This user liked this post: AfloatinClaret

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10088
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4161 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:47 pm

Much rather have a sell on to pay from a large profit from any transfer. Guarantees the player and normally the club has done well at the same time.

claretandy
Posts: 4751
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 953 times
Has Liked: 238 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by claretandy » Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:49 pm

Burnley1989 wrote:
Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:17 pm
If only it was that easy mate
We paid peanuts for Ben Mee but City have a 40% sell-on, now hopefully Ben won't ever be sold. Tarky on the other hand, if we'd have payed a bit more up front to lower the sell-on from 25% to 15%, that could be worth £5M.

FactualFrank
Posts: 25445
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2016 12:46 am
Been Liked: 6930 times
Has Liked: 11660 times
Location: Leeds

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by FactualFrank » Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:55 pm

claretandy wrote:
Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:49 pm
We paid peanuts for Ben Mee but City have a 40% sell-on, now hopefully Ben won't ever be sold. Tarky on the other hand, if we'd have payed a bit more up front to lower the sell-on from 25% to 15%, that could be worth £5M.
It's another of those after the fact, just as it was with a few posters on here saying we shouldn't have signed Gibson because Mee or Tarky didn't get injuries.

A higher sell-on fee in exchange for paying less, lowers the risk from our end, as we didn't know he'd turn into a £50m player. Also, Brentford may have refused a lower % anyway and probably would have / did, as they are renowned for selling players with high sell-on clauses.

claretandy
Posts: 4751
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 953 times
Has Liked: 238 times

Re: James Tarkowski in the news

Post by claretandy » Thu Aug 06, 2020 4:15 pm

FactualFrank wrote:
Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:55 pm
It's another of those after the fact, just as it was with a few posters on here saying we shouldn't have signed Gibson because Mee or Tarky didn't get injuries.

A higher sell-on fee in exchange for paying less, lowers the risk from our end, as we didn't know he'd turn into a £50m player. Also, Brentford may have refused a lower % anyway and probably would have / did, as they are renowned for selling players with high sell-on clauses.
It could also be us not willing to pay the fee, it costs you more in the long run, especially when you end up with a Pope or Tarkowski worth 50m + each.

Post Reply