Leighton Clarkson

[dazzy_deff]

55 minutes ago, Ten Caat said:

Yep, a loan would only make sense if they were giving him a contract extension (which seems very unlikely) or if they tried to sell him in the transfer window but hadn't managed to do so and it was now in the last 24-48 hours prior to that transfer window closing

Epl teams are quite notorious for insisting a player signs a small extension before loaning them out. One year extension followed by a one year loan wouldn't surprise me.

[King Street Loon]

32 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

Epl teams are quite notorious for insisting a player signs a small extension before loaning them out. One year extension followed by a one year loan wouldn't surprise me.

Protects their investment in the player as well.

They see that he can perform on the European stage, it means they can value him more for selling on, which will inevitably happen.

A loan is what I think will happen, player in agreement of course.

[fine-n-dandy]

2 hours ago, GeorgeStreetReds said:

The chances of ICT, who finished 6th in the Championship, beating Celtic is about 100/1. We should be cracking on now.

I wouldn’t personally be so cocky as to say Celtic are guaranteed to win & I certainly wouldn’t offer anyone 100/1 on Caley. I would maybe risk about 10/1 lol. 
 

it’s a cup final. Caley already have previous for fkn over Celtic & Celtics defence is in turmoil lately.

 

would be just our luck that worst case happens. 

1 hour ago, KenDodd'sDad said:

Can't see how a loan makes sense to Liverpool if it's the last year of his contract?

Smaller fee that we can afford plus hefty sell on percentage a la Duk? (I know we may not have paid a fee for Duk but the same principle applies).

We have to hope for a loan imo (& that Liverpool offer him a contract extension) because if they decide they’re selling him then we will not be able to compete with highest offers, probably not even close.

If English clubs are willing to spend £2m on a McCrorie & a Cosgrove & even more on likes of Nisbet etc. then damn sure they will spend a lot more than we can dream of affording for Clarkson. I don’t even think a ‘loan to buy’ will be an option for us in reality sadly. 

[King Street Loon]

2 hours ago, slippers said:

As much as I’d be buzzing with a return of Clarkson on loan it’s almost going to be a let down if it’s not permanent with all the rumours flying about. 

You'll have potentially had 2 years of him, that's the norm for a player of his quality at a club like ours these days.

Only thing we'd miss out on is a fee.

[Parklife]

44 minutes ago, dazzy_deff said:

Epl teams are quite notorious for insisting a player signs a small extension before loaning them out. One year extension followed by a one year loan wouldn't surprise me.

 

10 minutes ago, King Street Loon said:

Protects their investment in the player as well.

They see that he can perform on the European stage, it means they can value him more for selling on, which will inevitably happen.

A loan is what I think will happen, player in agreement of course.

Seems the most likely scenario to me. 

[zeroisgod76]

12 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

We have to hope for a loan imo (& that Liverpool offer him a contract extension) because if they decide they’re selling him then we will not be able to compete with highest offers, probably not even close.

If English clubs are willing to spend £2m on a McCrorie & a Cosgrove & even more on likes of Nisbet etc. then damn sure they will spend a lot more than we can dream of affording for Clarkson. I don’t even think a ‘loan to buy’ will be an option for us in reality sadly. 

Whatever the outcome (loan or permanent) you've got to assume a deal has already been done with Liverpool. The constant teasing on social media by both the player and the club, the interview that is being held back until next week for some reason, the rumours now in the press.

Something is happening and it seems highly likely Clarkson will be here next season... and if a deal is already in place just waiting to be announced then it doesn't really matter if other teams could potentially pay more.

[fine-n-dandy]

26 minutes ago, zeroisgod76 said:

Whatever the outcome (loan or permanent) you've got to assume a deal has already been done with Liverpool. The constant teasing on social media by both the player and the club, the interview that is being held back until next week for some reason, the rumours now in the press.

Something is happening and it seems highly likely Clarkson will be here next season... and if a deal is already in place just waiting to be announced then it doesn't really matter if other teams could potentially pay more.

If Liverpool are selling him it won’t be to us is all I am saying as they missed out on a lot of CL money confirmed last night. 
If they are extending his contract I am very confident we keep him until at least January 👍

 

The delayed announcement is probably that it’s ‘confirmed’ loan but dependent on outcome of SC. So paperwork is ready to be signed 

[minijc]

2 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

If Liverpool are selling him it won’t be to us is all I am saying as they missed out on a lot of CL money confirmed last night. 
If they are extending his contract I am very confident we keep him until at least January 👍

 

The delayed announcement is probably that it’s ‘confirmed’ loan but dependent on outcome of SC. So paperwork is ready to be signed 

lol

[zeroisgod76]

5 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

If Liverpool are selling him it won’t be to us is all I am saying as they missed out on a lot of CL money confirmed last night. 
If they are extending his contract I am very confident we keep him until at least January 👍

 

The delayed announcement is probably that it’s ‘confirmed’ loan but dependent on outcome of SC. So paperwork is ready to be signed 

If they're selling him with a year left on his contract on the back of 3 cup appearances for Liverpool 3 years ago, a failed loan at Blackburn and one succesful season at the dons they're not going to be selling him for enough money to make any impact on their loss of CL money. £1-2 million at  a push i'd imagine, a drop in the ocean for a club like Liverpool.

[slippers]

15 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

If Liverpool are selling him it won’t be to us is all I am saying as they missed out on a lot of CL money confirmed last night. 
If they are extending his contract I am very confident we keep him until at least January 👍

 

The delayed announcement is probably that it’s ‘confirmed’ loan but dependent on outcome of SC. So paperwork is ready to be signed 

We still won’t know regarding cup final next week… 

[Dandyesque]

1 minute ago, slippers said:

We still won’t know regarding cup final next week… 

It shouldn't need that.

If we can spend £600k on Miovski, £800k on that Venezuelan full back who's name escapes me, £1-1.5M on a proven player of his age should fit right into our strategy. 

He's undoubtedly going to end up playing in the EPL later in his career.  He'd already be in the Scotland squad if his granny was born the right side of the border. 

[Big Hat Logan]

If he’s available will the club spend a chunk of this money we are potentially going to get from Europe etc? I think if we can then we should. He’s a fantastic player.

[Sheepo]

Why would Liverpool loan him now, surely they would wait and see what offers come in first

[Dandyesque]

3 minutes ago, Sheepo said:

Why would Liverpool loan him now, surely they would wait and see what offers come in first

Where the player is keen to move to might come into it as well. Particularly if we're trying to make the deal permanent as indicated. 

[Parklife]

5 minutes ago, Sheepo said:

Why would Liverpool loan him now, surely they would wait and see what offers come in first

I'd say they'll be happy how's he developing over past 4 months and will be keen to allow him to continue that where's he's a major part of the first team, will be a focal point of all we do and he's happy. 

[Ten Caat]

17 minutes ago, Big Hat Logan said:

If he’s available will the club spend a chunk of this money we are potentially going to get from Europe etc? I think if we can then we should. He’s a fantastic player.

Well I'd agree but given Liverpool are still due us a fair bit of cash for the the Ramsay transfer last summer (transfer fees are generally paid up  in instalments over the length of the contract that the player signs with his new club and not in a lump sum)......it would surely be more sensible just to deduct whatever we value Clarkson at off the balance of the Ramsay fee and use any further cash from Europe to buy a couple of other targets. I'm thinking in particular of trying to tempt Watford into selling us Pollock

[Dandyesque]

Just now, Ten Caat said:

Well I'd agree but given Liverpool are still due us a fair bit of cash for the the Ramsay transfer last summer (transfer fees are generally paid up  in instalments over the length of the contract that the player signs with his new club and not in a lump sum)......it would surely be more sensible just to deduct whatever we value Clarkson at off the balance of the Ramsay fee and use any further cash from Europe to buy a couple of other targets. I'm thinking in particular of trying to tempt Watford into selling us Pollock

It all amounts to the same thing.

If we're due money in instalments for Ramsay, they will already be accounted for. Literally. 

If its add-ons, that would be different - and 1 in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.

 

(Ramsay is mid-privet for the purposes of this analogy)

 

 

[Reed or deed]

14 hours ago, Millertime said:

If you aren't diluting nothing, then it's the opposite you're saying to what you want to?

You can’t dilute nothing. 

[Rico1903]

1 hour ago, fine-n-dandy said:

If Liverpool are selling him it won’t be to us is all I am saying as they missed out on a lot of CL money confirmed last night. 
If they are extending his contract I am very confident we keep him until at least January 👍

 

The delayed announcement is probably that it’s ‘confirmed’ loan but dependent on outcome of SC. So paperwork is ready to be signed 

That sounds like nonsense. 

[Dandyesque]

7 minutes ago, Rico1903 said:

That sounds like nonsense. 

Don't worry, he'll rephrase it 4 or 5 different ways over the next 24 hours. Maybe then it will make sense. Doubtful though. He'll have convinced himself he's 100% right either way.

[ERNIE]

Apart from a transfer fee there is the wages issue so more likely to be a loan I would have thought..

[fine-n-dandy]

1 hour ago, zeroisgod76 said:

If they're selling him with a year left on his contract on the back of 3 cup appearances for Liverpool 3 years ago, a failed loan at Blackburn and one succesful season at the dons they're not going to be selling him for enough money to make any impact on their loss of CL money. £1-2 million at  a push i'd imagine, a drop in the ocean for a club like Liverpool.

Clubs will be willing to risk a bigger fee than £1m-£2m for him is my point (McCrorie £2m as an example) & if these clubs ARE about we cannot compete I doubt

1 hour ago, slippers said:

We still won’t know regarding cup final next week… 

End of next week. When it’s confirmed either way if we can offer him just 2 euro games, or at least 8

26 minutes ago, Rico1903 said:

That sounds like nonsense. 

How so? Liverpool may be offering him an extension, if we can guarantee him European games until Jan it makes a big difference (in their view) for his continued development 

 

All speculation at moment & folk can laugh/ridicule all they want but I highly doubt anything is fully confirmed yet either way until such time as we know 100% where we stand in Europe. 

[Proud Dandy]

Outstanding bit of business if we can bring him back. Similar impact to Christie when we had him on loan. 
 

As someone said even another loan would be great, two years of Clarkson for no fee is pretty good business 

[WesthillWanderersFC]

1 minute ago, Proud Dandy said:

Outstanding bit of business if we can bring him back. Similar impact to Christie when we had him on loan. 
 

As someone said even another loan would be great, two years of Clarkson for no fee is pretty good business 

There will have been loan fees paid to Liverpool

[BodDon]

51 minutes ago, WesthillWanderersFC said:

There will have been loan fees paid to Liverpool

I doubt there would be, especially after his failed loan to Blackburn. I seen this as an opportunity for Liverpool to send him on loan and try get him to impress (which he has) to then put him on the shop window, they wouldn’t have been bothered about loan fees, more than likely just a wage percentage paid by us.

[aberdeen1970]

Do the club know that so many of their Finance and Accounts team post on here?

[caledonia]

Wage percentage is a loan fee imo.

[BodDon]

18 minutes ago, caledonia said:

Wage percentage is a loan fee imo.

I get that, I was more thinking a loan fee is how much you pay every month on top of paying the full wages for a player. They do it quite a lot down south, especially between Premier League clubs.

I’d say paying a wage percentage is basically the same as having a free transfer for the season so no “fee” is involved as such.

[aberdeen1970]

20 minutes ago, BodDon said:

I get that, I was more thinking a loan fee is how much you pay every month on top of paying the full wages for a player. They do it quite a lot down south, especially between Premier League clubs.

I’d say paying a wage percentage is basically the same as having a free transfer for the season so no “fee” is involved as such.

It's still a fee whichever way it's dressed up

[Parklife]

39 minutes ago, BodDon said:

I get that, I was more thinking a loan fee is how much you pay every month on top of paying the full wages for a player. They do it quite a lot down south, especially between Premier League clubs.

I’d say paying a wage percentage is basically the same as having a free transfer for the season so no “fee” is involved as such.

Who gives a fuck.