1 hour ago, axman2526 said:

Reports are Brightons price for Man City was 50mill. City refused this and said 40mill no higher.

When we came in Brighton wanted Levi Colwill included but we have proposed straight cash. Brighton rejected our offer of 50mill and have increased their asking price, with that price reported anywhere from 60mill to 70mill. They are also trying to agree a deal for Levi Colwill on the side, making this a sticking point.

Didn't we sell Lamptey to these sh*tholes for literally peanuts. It's infuriating that we constantly sell promising players so cheaply to these sh*te clubs but face such antics when we want to sign players from them. Hope they get relegated and forced to sell him for 20 mill next season.

I see City are in negotiations with Anderlecht for a left back. Safe to assume that they’ll sign him for 20 million, we’ll pay 60 million for Cucurella and sell Colwill to BHA for 5 million. And Cucurella will be the least best of the three players.

In three years City will sell their player to Arsenal for 55 million, we’ll loan Cucurella to Barcelona (paying 95% of his wages) and we’ll resign Colwill for 85 million whilst he’s recovering from an ACL injury and a triple heart bypass.

City have moved on, and we should too. Brightons value of a player with 1 good season of PL football being worth more than Sterling is ridiculous.

Apparently Brighton have moved the goalposts on this. 

we were confident on Monday our offer of 50mill would be accepted as this was the price quoted City.

Have Brighton want Levi Colwill included either directly, or sold separately, at a value of only 7.5mill, with no buy back and only a first option clause.

Such a clause would be like the one we had with Ake and Bournemouth. When City offer 40mill and it was accepted we were offered the chance to match it and declined.

Brighton want the same with Levi so if Pool, City or whoever offer 50mill then we can match it. They don't want a buyback as it lessens their ability to make extra profit.

We don't want that and are reluctant to sell so Brighton have increased their asking price. So unless we agree with them on Colwill they want somewhere between 60-70mill for Cucurella.

14 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Apparently Brighton have moved the goalposts on this. 

we were confident on Monday our offer of 50mill would be accepted as this was the price quoted City.

Have Brighton want Levi Colwill included either directly, or sold separately, at a value of only 7.5mill, with no buy back and only a first option clause.

Such a clause would be like the one we had with Ake and Bournemouth. When City offer 40mill and it was accepted we were offered the chance to match it and declined.

Brighton want the same with Levi so if Pool, City or whoever offer 50mill then we can match it. They don't want a buyback as it lessens their ability to make extra profit.

We don't want that and are reluctant to sell so Brighton have increased their asking price. So unless we agree with them on Colwill they want somewhere between 60-70mill for Cucurella.

he should go on strike if they price him out like that, ridiculous

1 minute ago, azpi28 said:

he should go on strike if they price him out like that, ridiculous

Why? He signed a 5 year contract. Did he insist a minimum fee clause was put in? Did his agent ensure a clause for release to a CL team?

Apparently not, stupid on their part.

1 hour ago, Hessleboink said:

I think Brighton are taking the piss, tbh, and agree with what someone posted above: if they really want Colwill, then this should make our position stronger, ie, they'll take 50 Million (the price they supposedly quoted City), plus an agreed fee for Colwill. 

But they seem to be saying, give us Colwill and £55+ million? 

£42.5 million + Colwill (assuming he'd move), with a buy back of 25 million coming into effect within 2 years would be fair. That way, if he kicks on, they triple their money, same as they have with Cucurella. 

Disagree that they are taking the piss. They see an opportunity and have us over a barrel. It would be disgraceful if they didn't try to maximise their leverage.

Any impact or increased cost to Chelsea is down to 1 thing. Ourselves. 

If we had our house in order and targets identified, we could have secured our business earlier. Of course the price will increase if we are trying to sign a player from another epl team 2 days before the start of the season. 

 

 

1 minute ago, axman2526 said:

Why? He signed a 5 year contract. Did he insist a minimum fee clause was put in? Did his agent ensure a clause for release to a CL team?

Apparently not, stupid on their part.

they pretended that 50 million was the price they wanted

we offer that 

they should accept

2 minutes ago, azpi28 said:

they pretended that 50 million was the price they wanted

we offer that 

they should accept

That was the price apparently,  but that was when? It is natural the price increases as we get closer to the start of the season. 

Had City paid £50m last week, Brighton could have signed someone this week. Is leaving it so late gives them zero chance to spend it before the first game, so it's natural the price increases (alongside the inconvenience for them)

3 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

That was the price apparently,  but that was when? It is natural the price increases as we get closer to the start of the season. 

Had City paid £50m last week, Brighton could have signed someone this week. Is leaving it so late gives them zero chance to spend it before the first game, so it's natural the price increases (alongside the inconvenience for them)

but not a 20 million increase. Maybe 5 or 7 extra for the inconvenience 

but they are playing Man Utd so they might have a chance of winning even without Cucurella 

44 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

City have moved on, and we should too. Brightons value of a player with 1 good season of PL football being worth more than Sterling is ridiculous.

Sterling had 1 year on his contract was on 300K a week and City had replacements.

Cucurella has a long term contract and is by far Brightons best player who they have no hope of replacing. The selling club sets the Value

We paid 58m for a player who had never had a good season in a weaker league.  Cucu looks like a bargain at 50m in comparison.

Edited August 3, 20223 yr by HazardousChoice

maybe i was wrong and just frustrated that it takes so long! 

 

do they know something we don't?

is Christian Falk reliable?

Edited August 3, 20223 yr by azpi28

Could of sworn the reports Brighton wanted more than the 50m were fake. 

34 minutes ago, azpi28 said:

maybe i was wrong and just frustrated that it takes so long! 

 

do they know something we don't?

is Christian Falk reliable?

What has it got to do with Bayern??

38 minutes ago, HazardousChoice said:

Sterling had 1 year on his contract was on 300K a week and City had replacements.

Cucurella has a long term contract and is by far Brightons best player who they have no hope of replacing. The selling club sets the Value

We paid 58m for a player who had never had a good season in a weaker league.  Cucu looks like a bargain at 50m in comparison.

Disagree there mate, 3rd best player for me behind Bissouma and Lamptey.

50 minutes ago, azpi28 said:

 

 

German football expert talking about Alonso to Barca, Emerson for sale and no takers and Cucurella to Chelsea...what?

11 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

What has it got to do with Bayern??

Disagree there mate, 3rd best player for me behind Bissouma and Lamptey.

Bissouma doesn't even play for Brighton anymore 

Lamptey was great before his Injury but he's not got back to his previous level yet.

Edited August 3, 20223 yr by HazardousChoice

14 minutes ago, HazardousChoice said:

Bissouma doesn't even play for Brighton anymore 

Lamptey was great before his Injury but he's not got back to his previous level yet.

No he does not, just in the context of who Brightons best players last season were, from an outsiders point of view, it looked like Bissouma and Lamptey followed by Cucurella. Though Brighton fans would know better.

1 hour ago, nonotnowjim said:

Disagree that they are taking the piss. They see an opportunity and have us over a barrel. It would be disgraceful if they didn't try to maximise their leverage.

Any impact or increased cost to Chelsea is down to 1 thing. Ourselves. 

If we had our house in order and targets identified, we could have secured our business earlier. Of course the price will increase if we are trying to sign a player from another epl team 2 days before the start of the season. 

We are not over a barrel. Because just like Citeh we can also just walk away. We made an offer greater than Citeh. They can take it or leave it.

He can stay at Brighton and enjoy the rest of his time there.

1 hour ago, nonotnowjim said:

Disagree that they are taking the piss. They see an opportunity and have us over a barrel. It would be disgraceful if they didn't try to maximise their leverage.

Any impact or increased cost to Chelsea is down to 1 thing. Ourselves. 

If we had our house in order and targets identified, we could have secured our business earlier. Of course the price will increase if we are trying to sign a player from another epl team 2 days before the start of the season. 

Time to move on. Like City

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/marc-cucurella-chelsea-brighton-transfer-27650604

15 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/marc-cucurella-chelsea-brighton-transfer-27650604

Brighton trying to be big 

Edited August 3, 20223 yr by azpi28

 

HERE WE GO

Thank God 

2 hours ago, azpi28 said:

maybe i was wrong and just frustrated that it takes so long! 

 

do they know something we don't?

is Christian Falk reliable?

A few years ago he had direct connections to the Bayern board who feeded him with information. For some reason he has no direct sources in the bayern board anymore. They prefer now to feed Plettenberg from Sky Germany with their informations.

So Mr. True Christian Falk is no longer a reliable source and is more a desperate journalist who is dreaming of the past where his informations have been first class.