Traff

[Woodleyclaret]

Staying or going ? This saga allegedly involving two of the richest clubs in the league is getting tedious.We need a quicker resolution so we can get a replacement and bed them into the team.

[Goalkeeper]

What should Alan do to keep you happy?

[Woodleyclaret]

Easy,focus on developing our squad for the challenge ahead and not this multiclub nonsense

[claretonthecoast1882]

Easy,focus on developing our squad for the challenge ahead and not this multiclub nonsense

Maybe by not accepting the 1st bid that is made was done so with developing the squad in mind.

Or would you rather we just accept 20m and move on ?

[fidelcastro]

Easy,focus on developing our squad for the challenge ahead and not this multiclub nonsense

I'm sure he'll pull the plug on the Espanyol deal, now that he's just read that.

[Clovius Boofus]

What should Alan do to keep you happy?

Accept the first offer so we can get a replacement and bed them into the team.

[Jmw]

He is going, won’t play tomorrow, isn’t training with first team and didn’t meet the kids at the open training session.

[northeastclaret]

It’s not about accepting the first offer it’s about setting an acceptable offer and saying if that’s not met he stays with us, maybe even a deadline date for that offer so we can get on with planning for the new season.

Obviously that doesnt mean we would refuse the right offer eventually, but at least he is not training on his own like an outcast, whilst the rest of the team were in Portugal.

[beddie]

Dig our heels in and hold out for the figure we’re looking for.

[northeastclaret]

Staying or going ? This saga allegedly involving two of the richest clubs in the league is getting tedious.We need a quicker resolution so we can get a replacement and bed them into the team.

You are totally right , they want a keeper
who they believe is capable of being their number one for many years and probably Englands number for many years as well, but won’t pay a realistic value. Pathetic.

[fatboy47]

It’s not about accepting the first offer it’s about setting an acceptable offer and saying if that’s not met he stays with us, maybe even a deadline date for that offer so we can get on with planning for the new season.

Obviously that doesnt mean we would refuse the right offer eventually, but at least he is not training on his own like an outcast, whilst the rest of the team were in Portugal.

At some future point hindsight may suggest that we were unwise to allow Trafford to be holding fairly public discussions with the big fish and agreeing terms etc before any fee had been agreed. In doing so we've clearly shifted the balance of power towards potential buyers.
Hope I don't need to explain why....it's not rocket science.

[ClaretsPadiham]

Could they loan him back for the season ?

[NewClaret]

Could they loan him back for the season ?

No, according to Rileybobs it’s against the rules.

[NewClaret]

I think it looks very obvious that he’s leaving because he’s not training.

I expect the delay is potentially PSR related, or maybe we’ve not been offered the right price yet by either City or Newcastle.

The Newcastle move is an interesting one because with Isak leaving maybe they won’t be as competitive next year. They have lost out on a lot of targets so maybe they’re a less attractive prospect for incoming players now.

There’s also rumours that City are not selling Ederson though, in which case I can’t see Trafford going as number two.

I’ve written him off for us. Mor interested now in who is replacing him vs whether he’s leaving/staying.

[RVclaret]

I think it looks very obvious that he’s leaving because he’s not training.

I expect the delay is potentially PSR related, or maybe we’ve not been offered the right price yet by either City or Newcastle.

The Newcastle move is an interesting one because with Isak leaving maybe they won’t be as competitive next year. They have lost out on a lot of targets so maybe they’re a less attractive prospect for incoming players now.

There’s also rumours that City are not selling Ederson though, in which case I can’t see Trafford going as number two.

I’ve written him off for us. Mor interested now in who is replacing him vs whether he’s leaving/staying.

It’s been announced he’s going to City. It’s done.

[ecc]

I think it looks very obvious that he’s leaving because he’s not training.

I expect the delay is potentially PSR related, or maybe we’ve not been offered the right price yet by either City or Newcastle.

The Newcastle move is an interesting one because with Isak leaving maybe they won’t be as competitive next year. They have lost out on a lot of targets so maybe they’re a less attractive prospect for incoming players now.

There’s also rumours that City are not selling Ederson though, in which case I can’t see Trafford going as number two.

I’ve written him off for us. Mor interested now in who is replacing him vs whether he’s leaving/staying.

He has to go now. We need the money, his head is no longer at the club. Time to move on.

[Spijed]

If Ederson stays as number one then where will that leave Trafford in a years time?

Will Guardiola then throw him in as number one, despite hardly playing for a full season (aside from cup games)?

Great for his bank balance, but going from first choice at one club to being on the bench at another.

[IanMcL]

If Ederson stays as number one then where will that leave Trafford in a years time?

Will Guardiola then throw him in as number one, despite hardly playing for a full season (aside from cup games)?

Great for his bank balance, but going from first choice at one club to being on the bench at another.

One keeper gets league, the other Euros and Cups. Plenty of matches and success.

[GetIntoEm]

Not even sure Ederson is first choice there now. Be interesting to see what happens

[Rileybobs]

If Ederson stays as number one then where will that leave Trafford in a years time?

Will Guardiola then throw him in as number one, despite hardly playing for a full season (aside from cup games)?

Great for his bank balance, but going from first choice at one club to being on the bench at another.

Every player should stay at Burnley.

[Tricky Trevor]

Ederson started picking up niggly injuries and is over 30yo. Maybe Pep doesn't think he can get a full season out of him and rates Traff above Ortega?

[NewClaret]

It’s been announced he’s going to City. It’s done.

Announced?

[Walkerpool]

27 million seems low to me hopefully we will get couple of loan players from City.

[NewClaret]

Announced?

Ignore - just seen the transfer thread.

[theduke]

£27m?!?

[Jmw]

It’s the same net cash to Burnley as getting around £35m from Newcastle which would be about right.

[fatboy47]

It’s the same net cash to Burnley as getting around £35m from Newcastle which would be about right.

It's really not.

[ClaretTony]

27 million seems low to me hopefully we will get couple of loan players from City.

We can't have a couple of loan players from City, the rules are no more than one from any club.

[Rileybobs]

It’s the same net cash to Burnley as getting around £35m from Newcastle which would be about right.

Not necessarily. It’s likely a sell on clause, say 20%, is based on the ‘profit’ we make from selling Trafford. So if we buy for say £15m and sell for £35m, the 20% could be based on the £20m difference, which would be just £4m.

In this case the equivalent fee from Newcastle would be more in the region of £30m.

[ClaretTony]

It’s the same net cash to Burnley as getting around £35m from Newcastle which would be about right.

Had we accepted the same offer from Newcastle and it had gone through, we'd have had to pay City a sizeable amount as part of the sell on. Here we don't so in those terms it is a better deal.

[wilks_bfc]

Not necessarily. It’s likely a sell on clause, say 20%, is based on the ‘profit’ we make from selling Trafford. So if we buy for say £15m and sell for £35m, the 20% could be based on the £20m difference, which would be just £4m.

In this case the equivalent fee from Newcastle would be more in the region of £30m.

Plus any money that we would have still owed City from when we signed Trafford from them that we no longer have to pay them

[Rileybobs]

Plus any money that we would have still owed City from when we signed Trafford from them that we no longer have to pay them

I don’t think it quite works like that.

[Yorkshirelad]

Whatever way it works you would hope our financial people and maybe the manager would believe the deal is better financially for us at least and with the potential of a player loan or buy at a slightly cheaper price !!!!

Our guys aren’t daft the deal must be better than the Newcastle offer

[Rileybobs]

Whatever way it works you would hope our financial people and maybe the manager would believe the deal is better financially for us at least and with the potential of a player loan or buy at a slightly cheaper price !!!!

Our guys aren’t daft the deal must be better than the Newcastle offer

Unless Trafford was adamant that he didn’t want to go to Newcastle.

[Milltown1882]

Good move all around in the circumstances. All the best to him.

[ecc]

What is our situation re. PSR.

[JR1882]

What is our situation re. PSR.

There was talk in some media circles that we had set a deadline of the end of this month for Traffords sale in order for the profits to be declared in this years PSR calculations.

[ecc]

There was talk in some media circles that we had set a deadline of the end of this month for Traffords sale in order for the profits to be declared in this years PSR calculations.

Thank you, JR1882. I presume that's why our outlay on incomings has been relatively low and also why we have to sell Trafford. I also presume we'll be able to buy in August given the reported bid for Sargent and interest in other players. We have to get more bodies in to have any chance of staying up.

[pureclaret]

Not necessarily. It’s likely a sell on clause, say 20%, is based on the ‘profit’ we make from selling Trafford. So if we buy for say £15m and sell for £35m, the 20% could be based on the £20m difference, which would be just £4m.

In this case the equivalent fee from Newcastle would be more in the region of £30m.

I was led to believe the original 20% sell on clause was not on profit but on whatever the sale was. With a £14m original purchase rising to £19m on performance however if city wanted him back £40m and hes theirs or of they match another clubs purchase with no 20% sell on clause. this means we have made between £7m an £11 m profit

[Clovius Boofus]

It’s not about accepting the first offer

I wasn't being entirely serious.

[Goalposts]

All the best to him and he;s in the record books at this club for the season he just had. Wish him nothing but good will

[Colburn_Claret]

I think it's crap, but reality is it's about the most we could expect for him.
As others I think if you factor the sell on clause it equates to over 30 mill from another team.
Good luck Traff, I hope you grab that number 1 shirt.

[Tribesmen]

Yer good luck to the lad

[Vegas Claret]

Nixon reckons it's 31 million + extras

[NewClaret]

Nixon reckons it's 31 million + extras

Could be an FX mix up.

€31m = £27m.

[Row x]

Could be an FX mix up.

€31m = £27m.

My uneducated guess
Newcastle bid 31m
City match that, minus the 20% sell on, thus £27m.

[Claretnick]

Could be an FX mix up.

€31m = £27m.

Copied the original post by RVClaret

From Nixon:

Manchester City and Newcastle United have agreed a £31 million fee with Burnley for keeper James Trafford.

The Toon thought they had a deal when their long chase of Trafford reached the point of a price being settled on.

However City have a three day period to match the offer and they have - leaving the final decision to Trafford.

The England hopeful is likely to pick his old club if he thinks he is going to play.

Newcastle have leaked that they see him as competition for Nick Pope and will have to change that tack to have a chance.

Burnley will also get more in sell ons and a future sale clause.

[ClaretPete001]

Sky are reporting £27 million

[Woodleyclaret]

Good luck and thanks for last season James

[IanMcL]

Sky are reporting £27 million

I detect some difference of opinion in the reporting, which comes down to the wording of this newly found 'match the price' clause.

Reports vary from £27m + add-ons at Newcastle, taking it to a possible £31m

However, one report states Man City just have to match the £27m.

I would hope that the wording is not that definitive, being so much in City's favour. Add-pns are normal, do poof negotiation, when we purchased, if it is just the base price.

If Newcastle want him, they should up their offer swiftly and let Man City squirm.

Looks like Ederson staying. Ortega, no one wants, so Trafford back where he was, before he left for us!