January Transfer Window 2022

Devon Red

Active member
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
1,899
Location
Crediton
I'd be surprised if we got more than 750k for MJ.

Absolutely no way we would get more than 1m as mentioned earlier in the thread.
 
Joined
Nov 17, 2015
Messages
475
Location
Exeter
I'd be surprised if we got more than 750k for MJ.

Absolutely no way we would get more than 1m as mentioned earlier in the thread.
I think that’s why he won’t leave. I think the club will have set the figure at around £1 million though, because we aren’t in a position where we need to sell.

I get the £1 million+ valuations because he is that important to our season and I’d be gutted to lose him this window for anything less. But in reality no (sensible) club will pay that much money for a player who is probably reaching his limit now, coming into his prime footballing years.
 

andrew p long

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
9,177
Location
Hagley, Stourbridge
I'm not so sure we rejected 1 million for Key in the summer. I think we wanted something close to that and no one came in at that figure.
The problem here is what each side said and the way the offer was structured. Originally there was talk of a Sunderland bid of around 300k for Josh.

Subsequently they made a total of four offers which were rejected.

Sunderland said that the last offer *could* have been worth £1million plus. But that was inclusive of add ons. City seemed to want £1million plus cash up front before add ons. Its quite a common technique when a club says they want a specific sum to put together a bid that reaches that sum inclusive of add ons that are subject to conditions very unlikely to be fulfilled.

So even though Sunderland had bandied 'one million offer rejected' about the reality is that it was (much) less
 

manc grecian

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
19,831
Location
following through
I think that’s why he won’t leave. I think the club will have set the figure at around £1 million though, because we aren’t in a position where we need to sell.

I get the £1 million+ valuations because he is that important to our season and I’d be gutted to lose him this window for anything less. But in reality no (sensible) club will pay that much money for a player who is probably reaching his limit now, coming into his prime footballing years.
Very similar to Stockley in terms of how far up the football pyramid he could play at.
 

SaintJames

Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
737
I think that’s why he won’t leave. I think the club will have set the figure at around £1 million though, because we aren’t in a position where we need to sell.

I get the £1 million+ valuations because he is that important to our season and I’d be gutted to lose him this window for anything less. But in reality no (sensible) club will pay that much money for a player who is probably reaching his limit now, coming into his prime footballing years.
I agree Student. MJ is more valuable to us because we have practically set the team up to allow him free licence. I simply cant see teams higher up the pyramid playing in a similar way as there will be more than one creative goal scoring threats in a top L1 team let alone Championship. You dont get the best out of MJ in CM or up top or out wide so for me max of £500k
 

andrew p long

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
9,177
Location
Hagley, Stourbridge
Puzzling. I wonder

- what 'substantial' meant particularly as a) its said we have other offers made which by definition weren't substantial b) it didn't match our valuation?

- why the player wasn't named, when MT has previously been open about offers being made for Josh Key?
 

grecian-near-hell

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
4,322
Location
Cornwood
Puzzling. I wonder

- what 'substantial' meant particularly as a) its said we have other offers made which by definition weren't substantial b) it didn't match our valuation?

- why the player wasn't named, when MT has previously been open about offers being made for Josh Key?
Perhaps MT is beginning to learn about being too open about things and has seen how it unsettles players, or perhaps not.........
 

iscalad

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
18,603
Location
Far away across the field
Puzzling. I wonder

- what 'substantial' meant particularly as a) its said we have other offers made which by definition weren't substantial b) it didn't match our valuation?

- why the player wasn't named, when MT has previously been open about offers being made for Josh Key?
Maybe negotiations are ongoing
 
Top