Jump to content

Recommended Posts


4 hours ago, Drew said:

Rumoured to be around 15%, but nothing confirmed as far as I know.

I still think if there was a sell on clause our board would have shouted it from the rafters as it would mean fantastic negotiating skills given the contract, or lack thereof,  situation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, paul torfason said:

can Morgan play against dons in cup,or is it just against Celtic after we beat the sheep?

He's already played in the cup this season so I don't see what Celtic would have to gain by refusing permission to play against the Dons.

As it looks like Liam Smith is here for the season hopefully he will be available too.

I suspect neither would be allowed to play against their parent club.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, smcc said:

Why woulds they shout it from the rafters? Have you never heard of keeping your cards close to your chest?

Why be quiet? It's not as if any team whose player we go for is going to think we have money to burn. It's possible future earnings at best. On the other side of the coin the very fact our board were able to eek out more from the sale of Morgan makes them look far more than competent and lets the fans know they did their absolute best. Add to this that they've never kept quiet about any other add ons they've manage to broker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

It's not as if any team whose player we go for is going to think we have money to burn.

Of course they bloody will!  We've already paid a fee for a player recently and clubs will milk this as hard as they can!!

 

23 minutes ago, stlucifer said:

Add to this that they've never kept quiet about any other add ons they've manage to broker.

Were the add-ons not negotiated and publicised by the old regime (came out in the wash at club agm's, perhaps to appease shareholders).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rabuddies said:

Of course they bloody will!  We've already paid a fee for a player recently and clubs will milk this as hard as they can!!

 

Were the add-ons not negotiated and publicised by the old regime (came out in the wash at club agm's, perhaps to appease shareholders).

Tut, Tut. No need for the tantrum.  IF clubs think we have money to burn it won't be because of money we MIGHT get four years from now. There is no logical reason for not disclosing the fact the club made a tremendous deal for a player who could have walked for even less peanuts at the end of the season. You guys have been reading too many mystery novels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, stlucifer said:

I still think if there was a sell on clause our board would have shouted it from the rafters as it would mean fantastic negotiating skills given the contract, or lack thereof,  situation

I read somewhere in the press £300,000 plus add on's ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, stlucifer said:

Add to this that they've never kept quiet about any other add ons they've manage to broker.

Really? I've heard very little by way of actual detail from our current board about any of this stuff. We've now sold Morgan, Mallan and McAllister to big clubs and I'd say very little has been revealed.

The only confirmation of any sell-on that I've seen has been Gilmour on Twitter, repeating the 33% McGinn deal, which is fair enough because he's probably quite proud of that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really? I've heard very little by way of actual detail from our current board about any of this stuff. We've now sold Morgan, Mallan and McAllister to big clubs and I'd say very little has been revealed.
The only confirmation of any sell-on that I've seen has been Gilmour on Twitter, repeating the 33% McGinn deal, which is fair enough because he's probably quite proud of that!


I don’t do twitter , would I be right in thinking that the 33% tweets from Gilmour came after he had moved on ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

 


I don’t do twitter , would I be right in thinking that the 33% tweets from Gilmour came after he had moved on ?

 

Nice to know he was as discrete as the new board.  

Edited by pod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

 


I don’t do twitter , would I be right in thinking that the 33% tweets from Gilmour came after he had moved on ?

 

Yeah, that's where I read it. Didn't realise the new board had been talking about it as well.

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


×