Value

[Guest]

I get the sense that every transfer is going to be guided against "well we only got 4 mil for Austin".

In four months time that 4 mil would be nothing. You cant read into that value when comparing against other potential signings.

Hope we put that 4 mil to good use and sooner rather than later.

[3London]

I get the sense that every transfer is going to be guided against "well we only got 4 mil for Austin".

In four months time that 4 mil would be nothing. You cant read into that value when comparing against other potential signings.

Hope we put that 4 mil to good use and sooner rather than later.

but £4 mill will buy us nothing in terms of replacing Charlie...i think a few more will need to be sold before we can get any sort of adequate replacement!

[lymehoop]

Soton turned down a £9m offer from Liverpool for Long allegedly and Naismith is costing Naarwich £8m

[3London]

Soton turned down a £9m offer from Liverpool for Long allegedly and Naismith is costing Naarwich £8m

Exactly!

there should be some sort of scale as in other industries. it feels like we are the ones who get the bad deals most of the time!

[Abseits]

Errrr.... didn't WE get Charlie for £4mllion? All transfer fees do is reflect how much remaining contract a player has at his current club..... they have little relation to actual talent. To be honest, when the Bosman rule came in I assumed transfer fees would gradually wither and disappear entirely; I reckon it's only Sky's filthy lucre that has enabled mad fees like Naismith/Long to happen as these clubs are literally swimming in easy money.

[maidstone_hoop]

3 mill of the 4 mill we got has got us a bid acc petted for Washington.

Another good league 1 striker who looks like he can make the step up.

Makes sense now we sold Austin.

[qprjeff1882]

Also the club had to look at it that we had two weeks of the window left, if no one came in for Charlie or we had held out for a better offer than Southampton offered then we may well have ended up with the same situation as the last window. No one really knows for certain what happened during the summer about how many clubs actually tabled a serious bid, what those bids were and what clubs they were. We do know that Leicester allegedly bid £12 m but we also don't know for sure if it was the club that rejected bids or if it was Charlie himself. So in that respect they saw this chance as something they couldn't turn down given the situation. And with the reported add ons it really isn't that bad a deal if Charlie completes the necessary stages of the agreement. So lets just hope that Washington goes the way of Charlie and goes from strength to strength. Better we're doing something with the money than having a January transfer window like last Jan.

[dave58]

Been mugged by the saints!

[Jeems]

but £4 mill will buy us nothing in terms of replacing Charlie...

£0 in the summer would have bought us even less. It's not great, but given the circumstances, we should grateful we got £4mil and JFH is being allowed to invest back immediately.

[3London]

Been mugged by the saints!

just like we used to be Mugged by West Ham!

[jmelanie]

but £4 mill will buy us nothing in terms of replacing Charlie...i think a few more will need to be sold before we can get any sort of adequate replacement!

We paid (according to Burnley fans) 3.5 million for Charlie. I know we got lucky but no reason why we cant do that again.

[Bluehoop]

With 4 months left on his contract it equates to £1M per month. It's the only way to see it. No one was going to pay big money, just sit tight and get him for free in the summer, so in terms of value on remaining contract, it is a good deal. And as has been said by many already, the gamble on keeping him for this season was one that the majority would have taken. We need to move on and as mentioned, not try and compare every deal with what we got for a player with 4 months left and no prospect of a new contract being signed.

[1QPRDK]

With 4 months left on his contract it equates to £1M per month. It's the only way to see it. No one was going to pay big money, just sit tight and get him for free in the summer, so in terms of value on remaining contract, it is a good deal. And as has been said by many already, the gamble on keeping him for this season was one that the majority would have taken. We need to move on and as mentioned, not try and compare every deal with what we got for a player with 4 months left and no prospect of a new contract being signed.

Thank you Blue.

[QPR Richard]

Another way to look at it is, would fans be happy if we loaned Charlie for £1m a month from Southampton?

[nanocopic]

I am perfectly happy for Austin to go for £4 million, this season for both him (lots of niggling injuries that keep him out) and us is a write off. Just a average mid table finish and get a good pre season in with a bunch of new players as usual.